Works

1

*s

V

s

THE

WORKS

OF

NATHANIEL LARDNER, D. D

WITH A LIFE BY DR. KIPPIS.

IN TEN VOLUMES.

VOL. I.

LONDON :

JOSEPH OGLE ROBINSON, 42, POULTRY,

MDCCCXXIX.

BUNGAY :

STEREOTYPED AND PRINTED BY J. R. AND C. CHILDS.

CONTENTS OF THE FIRST VOLUME,
PART I. BOOK I.

CHAP. PAGE

Life of Dr. Lardner i

Preface - 3

Introduction 8

I. Of Princes and Governors mentioned in the New Testament 13

II. Of the State of the Jews in Judea during the ministry of our

Saviour and his Apostles - 35

III. Of the State of the Jews out of Judea - . . . 112

IV. Concerning the Jewish Sects and the Samaritans - - 123

V. Of the Jews' and Samaritans' Expectations, and their idea of

the Messiah 137

VI. Of the Great Corruption of the Jewish People 146

VII. The Circumstances of our Saviour's last Sufferings - 149

VIII. Of the Treatment which the Apostles and other Disciples of

Jesus met with from Jews and Gentiles - - 172

IX. Concerning divers Opinions and Practices of the Jews -. 212

X. Roman Customs mentioned in the New Testament - - 232

XI. Three Remarkable Facts. - - 250

BOOK II.

I. Three Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered - 260

II. Two Objections taken from the Silence of Josephus - 346

III. An Objection against the Fifteenth Year of Tiberius compared

with the Age of Jesus at his Baptism . 356

IV. Of Annas and Caiaphas - . 401

V. Of the different Names given to Herodias's first Husband by

the Evangelists and Josephus - 408

VI. Of Zacharias, Son of Barachias - - . ., . 417

VII. Of Theudas . .. *. . . 425

VIII. Of the Egyptian Impostor .... . . 434

The Conclusion - - - - . _ 439

An Appendix, concerning the Time of Herod's Death - 443

CONTENTS.

The Case of the Daemoniacs mentioned in the New Testa
ment : Four Discourses upon Mark v. 19, " Howbeit
Jesus suffered him not, but saith unto him, Go home to
thy friends, and tell them how great things the Lord hath
done for thee, and hath had compassion on thee."
Preface - 449

Discourse I. The History of the Two Daemoniacs in the Country
of the Gadarenes, which is recorded by three
Evangelists, explained, and improved - - 450

Discourse II. Two Opinions concerning the Case of those who were
called Daemoniacs : One supposing that such Per
sons were tormented, possessed, inhabited, and
acted, by one or more Spirits : The other that these
afflictive Cases were bodily Distempers only. And
the former of those opinions, as held in the time of
our Saviour and his Apostles, largely represented 464

Discourse III. The latter of those Opinions asserted, and supported

by divers Considerations - 473

Discourse IV. Objections against this Opinion stated and considered,

and the argument concluded ... 439
An Appendix for further illustrating the Subject - - 507

THE

LIFE

DR. NATHANIEL LARDNER.

DR. NATHANIEL LARDNER was born at Hawkhurst, in
the county of Kent, on the 6th of June, 1684. His father,
Mr. Richard Lardner, was a minister of respectable character
among- the protestant dissenters, and, for a considerable num
ber of years, pastor of a congregation at Deal ; but whether
he was in that situation at the time of his son's birth does not
appear : perhaps, as the toleration act had not then taken place,
he might not as yet have become a settled preacher. The
mother of our author was the daughter of a Mr. Collier, for
merly of the borough of Southwark, but who afterwards
retired to Hawkhurst, which is a large village, south of Cran-
brook, and lying in that part of Kent which borders upon
Sussex. It was probably at his grandfather's house that
young Lardner was born. Where he received his grammati
cal education, cannot now be ascertained; though it is
supposed, from his father's residence at Deal, that it might be
at that place. Wherever it was, there can be no doubt, from
the literature which he afterwards displayed, of his having
made an early progress in the knowledge of the learned lan
guages. From the grammar school he was removed to a dissent
ing academy in London, under the care of the Reverend Dr.
Joshua Oldfield. Here, however, he must have continued
but a very little time ; for in the latter end of 1699, being
then only in the sixteenth year of his age, he was sent to pro
secute his studies at Utrecht, under the professors D'Uries,
Graevius, and Burman, names of no small celebrity in the lite
rary world. Under such tutors, Mr. Lardner made a suitable

b

li THE LIFE OF

improvement in various branches of learning ; and he brought
back with him a testimonial from professor Burman, to that
purpose.

It was not uncommon, at that period, for the young inen
who were intended for the dissenting ministry in England, to
study abroad, and particularly in the universities of Holland.
Several persons, who afterwards became of no small consi
deration among the dissenters, and who distinguished them
selves by their valuable writings, were educated in this manner.
Mr. Martin Tomkins went over with Mr. Lardner to Utrecht,,
and they found there Mr. Daniel Neal.

After spending somewhat more than three years at Utrecht,
Mr. Lardner removed to Leyden, where he studied about
six months. In 1703, he returned to England, in company
with Mr. Tomkins and Mr. Neal ; and from that time to the
year 1709, we have no memorials concerning him. This
space was probably spent by him at his father's house, who
quitted Deal in 1703 or 1704, and came to reside in or near
London ; and we may be certain that young Mr. Lardner
employed himself in a close and diligent preparation for the
sacred profession which he had in view. He was not one of
those who are in haste to display their talents in the pulpit ;
for it was not till the second of August, 1709, when he was
above twenty-five years of age, that he preached his first ser
mon. This was at Stoke-Newington, for his friend Mr.
Martin Tomkins, who had become the minister of a congrega
tion at that place. The subject of Mr. Lardner's discourse
was taken from Romans i. 16; " For I am not ashamed of
the gospel of Christ ; for it is the power of God unto salvation
to every one that believeth ; to the Jew first, and also to the
Greek. " There could not have been a more proper text, for
a man who was destined, in the order of Divine Providence,
to be one of the ablest advocates for the authenticity and
truth of the Christian Revelation that ever existed. During
the four years which succeeded to this event, we have no in
formation concerning our author, excepting that he was a mem
ber of the congregational church under the pastoral charge of
the Rev. Mr. Matthew Clark, a gentleman of eminence among
the dissenting clergymen of that period, and father to Dr.
blark, a physician of character, reputation, and extensive
practice, who died not long since at Tottenham, in Middlesex.
In 1713, Mr. Lardner was invited to reside in the house of
Lady Treby, the widow of Sir George Treby, Knt. who had
been appointed Lord Chief Justice of the court of Common
leas in 1692, and had sustained that high office and dignity,

DR. LARDNER. iii

with great integrity and ability, till his decease in 1702. a
The proposal made to our author was, that he should be do
mestic chaplain to her ladyship, and tutor to her youngest son,
Brindley Treby. To this proposal he acceded ; and it need
not be said, how well qualified he was, by his knowledge,
judgment, and learning, for superintending a young gentle
man's education. After having conducted Mr. Treby's studies
three years, he accompanied him in an excursion into France,
the Austrian Netherlands, and the United Provinces, which
employed four months. From a journal which Mr. Lardner
kept of this tour, it was evident, that he did not lose the op
portunity it afforded him of making exact and judicious obser
vations on the manners and customs of the inhabitants whom
he saw and visited, and on the edifices and curiosities of the
countries through which he passed . How long he sustained the
specific character of tutor to young Mr. Treby, does not appear :
but he continued in Lady Treby's family till her death, which
happened in the beginning of the year 1721. By this event, he
was removed from a situation which seems to have been an
agreeable one, and was thrown into circumstances of some
perplexity and suspense. His own remarks will show the
state of his mind at that time. ' I am yet at a loss, ' says he,
how to dispose of myself. I can say, I am desirous of being
useful in the world. Without this, no external advantages
.relating to myself will make me happy: and yet I have no
prospect of being serviceable in the work of the ministry :
having preached many years without being favoured with the
approbation and choice of any one congregation.' b
It reflects no honour upon the dissenters, that a man of such
merit should so long have been neglected. But it must be
observed, that in elections which are dependant upon the
whole body of the congregation, a regard will usually be paid,
not only to internal abilities, but to external qualifications.
It is not probable that Mr. Lardner, even in his best days,
was possessed of a good elocution ; and his simple mode of
composition was not calculated to strike the multitude. Ra
tional preaching had not then made a very extensive progress
among the dissenters ; and it is to be lamented, that, when it
became more prevalent, it should too often be disjoined from
energy and pathos.

Two years after the death of Lady Treby, Mr. Lardner
met with another calamity, which greatly affected him. This

a Beatson's Political Index, part iii. p. 74.

b Memoirs of the Life and Writings of the late Rev. Nathaniel Lardner,
D. D. p. 4.

IV THE LIFE OP

was the decease oi his former pupil, Brindley Treby, Esq. a
gentleman for whom our author had the highest affection and
esteem. Indeed, he felt so deeply the loss of his friend, that
he imputed to it, in part, the increase of a deafness, which had
been coming upon him for some time before. In the begin
ning of the year 1724, he writes as follows : ' Mr. Cornish
* preached ; but I was not able to hear any thing he said, nor
' so much as the sound of his voice. I am, indeed, at present
' so deaf, that when I sit in the pulpit, and the congregation is
' singing, I can hardly tell whether they are singing or not.' c
Previously to this account of himself, and at least as early
as 1723, Mr. Lardner was engaged, in conjunction with a num
ber of ministers, in carrying on a course of lectures, on a
Tuesday evening, at the old Jewry. His first associates
were Mr. Hughes, Mr. Chandler, Mr. Harrison, Mr. Kench,
and Mr. Godwin ; the two latter of whom soon resigned the
connection, and their places were supplied by Mr. Calamy and
Mr. Mole.d

c Memoirs, ubi supra, p. 11.

d Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Obadiah Hughes was many years minister of a con
gregation in South wark, from which he removed to Westminster. By marriage
he became possessed of a large fortune. He was an acceptable preacher, and
printed some occasional sermons ; but did not otherwise distinguish himself in
the literary world.

On Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Samuel Chandler's abilities, learning, and writings,
it is needless to enlarge, as they cannot be unknown to any of my readers*
Such persons as wish to see a particular account of him, may have recourse to
the third volume of the Biographia Britannica.

Mr. Harrison was a minister of the Antipaedobaptist persuasion, who offi
ciated in Wild-Street. Not long after his having been engaged in the Tuesday
lecture, he conformed to the church of England, and preached a sermon at St.
Vedast's Foster-lane, in vindication of his conformity. The sermon, which
was afterwards printed, did not obtain the approbation of bishop Hoadly.
When Mr. Gough, another young dissenting minister, some years after, applied
to that prelate for orders, his lordship advised him not to follow Mr. Harrison's
example with regard to publication. This Mr. Gough was the author of a
pamphlet on the Causes of the Decay of the Dissenting Interest, an answer to
which was one of Dr. Doddridge's earliest performances. Mr. Gough published
likewise a volume of sermons, which are sensible and judicious, and not des
titute of elegance. He was of the school of Clarke and Hoadly, and was very
intimate with Dr. James Foster. Mr. Harrison became insane, and died in
early life: but there is no reason to believe that he was dissatisfied with his own.
conduct. For these particulars concerning him, the present Biographer is in
debted to an excellent and learned friend, the Rev. Edward Williams, of
Nottingham. The author of the Memoirs of the Life and Writings of Dr.
Lardner is mistaken in asserting, that Dr. Harris was one of the Tuesday even
ing lecturers: Dr. William Harris was then an old minister: whereas the
lecture was carried on by young men.

Mr (afterwards Dr.) Kench was, as well as Mr. Harrison, a Baptist minis
ter, and of considerable note in his day. I do not recollect that he published
any other than a few occasional discourses.

DR. LARDNER. V

At this time, and indeed many years before, Mr. Lardner
was a member of a literary society, consisting of ministers and
lay gentlemen, who met, on Monday evenings, at Chew's cof
fee-house, in Bow-lane, Cheapside. The chairman of this
society, at every meeting, proposed two questions, to be freely
and candidly debated; besides which, each member, in his
turn, produced an essay on some learned or entertaining sub
ject. Such institutions have been of eminent service to the
republic of literature : they have given rise to many impor
tant discoveries, and to many valuable works, which otherwise
would never have existed. A history of societies of this kind,
which are now diffused through every part of Europe, and are
extended to the Western and the Eastern world, tracing their
small beginnings, their gradual increase, their more perma
nent establishment, and their beneficial effects, would be a
very instructive and entertaining performance.

Another society, which met at Chew's coffee-house on a
Thursday, and of which Mr. Lardner was a member, con
sisted entirely of ministers. The gentlemen belonging to this
society, had a design of composing a Concordance of Things
to the Bible, and began to methodize the book of Proverbs for
that purpose. They had first drawn up a scheme of the whole
undertaking, the different parts of which were assigned to
Mr. Lardner, Mr. Cornish, Mr. Hughes, Mr. Read, Mr,
Clark, Mr. Hunt, Mr. Wroe, and Mr. Savage.e It doth not

Mr. Godwin was long the respectable pastor of a congregation that met in
Little St. Helen's, Bishopsgate-street. He was an intimate friend of Dr. Dod-
dridge, and assisted him much in correcting his works for the press, and in
drawing up the index to the Family Expositor.

Mr. Calamy, the son of the famous Dr. Edmund Calamy, was an ingenious
and learned man. He was for some time assistant to Dr. Benjamin Grosvenor,
but declined preaching several years before his death.

Mr. Mole was first a minister at Uxbridge, then at Rotherhithe, and last of
all at Hackney. At length he retired to Uxbridge, where he died not many years
since. In point of learning, he might be ranked with Lardner, Benson, and
Chandler. He was the author of some valuable publications, and employed the
latter part of his days in writing, in Latin, a life of the celebrated Laurentius
Valla, including the religious and literary history of the time. The manuscript
of this work Mr. Mole's executors, with an inattention which can never be
justified, permitted to be sold with his books at a common auction.

e Mr. Cornish was assistant to Mr. Joshua Bayes, sen. and continued in
that capacity till his death, which happened when he was under forty years of

age. — Mr. Hughes I have already mentioned Mr. James Read preached to

a society in New Broad Street, behind the Royal Exchange, first as assistant
to Dr. John Evans, author of the " Christian Temper," and other useful pub
lications, and afterwards as joint pastor with Dr. Allen. He had a brother,
Mr. Henry Read, who, to a very advanced age, was minister of a congregation
which met in St. Thomas's, Southwark j and of whom the following charac-f

vi THE LIFE OF

appear that the design was ever carried fully into execution;
and one impediment to it, so far as Mr. Lardrier was concern
ed, probably arose from the more important work in which
he now began to be engaged.

In one of the schemes for the Tuesday evening's lecture,
which is preserved in the Memoirs of the Life and Writings of
Dr. Lardner, the subjects are entirely of a practical and mo
ral nature, and admirably calculated for instruction and im
provement in that view. But besides treating upon subjects
of this kind, the gentlemen who carried on the lecture,
preached a course of sermons on the evidences of natural and
revealed religion. In this course, the proof of the Credibility
of the Gospel History was assigned to Mr. Lardner ; and in
the latter end of the year 1723, and the beginning of 1724, he
delivered three sermons on that most important object of
Christian inquiry. Here it was that the foundation was pro
bably laid of his great work. Certain it is, that from this
time, he was diligently engaged in writing the first part of his
Credibility. His modesty, however, was such, that he was
doubtful about the publication of it, and greatly regretted
that, by the decease of his dear friend and pupil, Mr. Treby,
he was deprived of his advice, on this and other occasions.

ter was given, between twenty and thirty years ago, in some verses that were
written upon the six Tuesday Salter's Hall Lecturers of that period.

" Through youth, through age, O Read, thy honest heart

" Hath never quitted the consistent part.

" Thy thoughts are useful, though thy stile is plain,

" And genuine goodness breathes through all thy strain."

Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Samuel Clark settled at St. Alban's, where he lived
many years, and died with great reputation. He was the author of a collection
of Scripture Promises, with a discourse prefixed concerning the proper use and
application of them. This work, which has gone through several editions, and
has afforded no small degree of consolation to many pious Christians, was re
commended by Dr. Watts. Dr. Clark published, likewise, three sermons on
the folly, sin, and danger of irresolution in religion. It is to the honour of this
gentleman, that he was the early patron of Dr. Doddridge, who ever retained
for him a filial regard and affection. He was the father of the late excellent Mr.
Samuel Clark, of Birmingham. Both father and son will probably be noticed
when Dr. Doddridge's life shall come to be written in the Biographia Bri-
tannica.

Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Jeremiah Hunt, of Pinner's Hall, was a very judicious
divine, and the author of several learned and valuable publications. Some ac
count of him will be found in the discourses of Dr. Lardner, who preached his
funeral seimon. — Of Mr. Wroe I am not able to give any intelligence. — Mr.
Savage was a worthy and sensible minister, who settled at Edmonton, where
he continued to the time of his decease. I do not recollect that he published
any thing, besides a few occasional sermons.

DR. LARDNER. vii

It is hence evident, how much Mr. Treby had profited by the
instructions which had been given him, since his tutor could
thus look up to him for his opinion and assistance.

Notwithstanding' Mr. Lardner's diffidence, he took courage
to proceed in his undertaking, and in February, 1727, pub
lished, in two volumes, octavo, the first part of * The Credi-

* bility of the Gospel History ; or, the facts occasionally
' mentioned in the New Testament confirmed by passages of
' ancient Authors, who were contemporary with our Saviour,
' or his Apostles, or lived near their time.' An appendix
was subjoined, concerning the time of Herod's death. It is
scarcely necessary to say how well this work was received by
the learned world. Not only was it highly approved of by the
Protestant Dissenters, with whom the author was more imme
diately connected, but by the clergy in general of the esta
blished church ; and its reputation gradually extended into
foreign countries. It is, indeed, an invaluable performance,
and hath rendered the most essential service to the cause of
Christianity. Whoever peruses this work, (and to him that
does not peruse it, it will be to his own loss,) will find it re
plete with admirable instruction, sound learning, and just and
candid criticism. It was not long before a second edition
was called for, and a third was published in 1741.

In the beginning of February, 1728, the coarse of Mr.
Lardner's studies was interrupted, and his life threatened, by
the attack of a violent fever, which proved of long conti
nuance. For some time his recovery was despaired of by his
relations and friends ; but he was relieved, and at length
happily restored to health, by the divine blessing on the pre
scriptions of Dr. (afterwards Sir Edward) Hulse, who was
called in to consult with the other physicians. Mr. Lardner's
own remark upon this occasion was as follows : ' I think God

* put it into my mind to send for Dr. Hulse, for from that

* time forward I mended.' His pious sentiments after his
recovery are thus expressed : « I thankfully acknowledge the
' great goodness of God, who raised me up again, and desire

* that this great mercy may be had in perpetual remembrance
' by me. * May I serve him the remainder of my time in this
' world with inviolable integrity, unshaken in my stedfastness
' by all the snares of a vain and deceitful world.' f

. With all Mr. Lardner's merit, he was forty-five years of age
before he obtained a settlement among the dissenters. On
the 24th of August, 1729, he happened to preach for the
Rev. Dr. William Harris at Crouched Friars ; and the con-
Memoirs, ubi supra, p. 1 1.

viii THE LIFE OF

sequence of it was, that he was unexpectedly invited by the
congregation to be assistant to their minister. After mature
deliberation he accepted the offer, which, as he declared in
his letter of acceptance, was peculiarly agreeable to him, be
cause it allotted him a part of service, in the work of the gos
pel, with their honoured pastor, for whom he had entertained,
from his early youth, a high regard and esteem. On the 14th
of September, he entered upon his new charge : and the sub
ject of his first sermon was taken from 2 Cor. v. 20. " Now
then we are ambassadors for Christ : as though God did
beseech you by us, we pray you, in Christ's stead, be recon
ciled to God." In Mr. Lardner's prayer before sermon, after
the intercessions for the public, and for Dr. Harris in par
ticular, he proceeded to pray for himself, in the following
strain of integrity and piety : ' And we beseech thee, do thou
' graciously assist thine unworthy servant, whom by thy pro-

* vidence thou hast also called to serve thee in this place.
' Grant that he may take great heed unto himself and his
' doctrine, that he may save himself and them that hear him.
' Do thou enlighten him more and more in the knowledge of
' the truth ; and grant that he may be faithful to thee, and
' speak the word with boldness, not shunning to declare the
' whole counsel of God, so far as he is acquainted therewith.
' And may the hearts of thy people be opened to receive the

* truth with all readiness : may they carefully and impartially
' examine the things which they hear, and embrace what is
' agreeable to thy will. O Lord, our hope is in thee ! do thou
' strengthen us, and make us sufficient for what thou callest
' us to. Let thy strength be irade perfect in our weakness :
' cause thy face to shine upon us ; let us see thy power and thy
' glory in the sanctuary. May some who are yet in darkness
' and ignorance be here enlightened ; may some be converted ;
' and may thy people be comforted, and continually edified
' more and more in their most holy faith. May we meet with
' thee in thine house, and have joy and pleasure in drawing
' near unto thee. May we, by all thy ordinances, by prayer,
' by the ministry of thy Word, and by thy Sacraments, be
' made more meet for all the events of providence ; for all
« the services and sufferings of this life ; and for the state of
' perfection and glory in the world to come.' His account of
this prayer is succeeded by the subsequent ejaculation. ' May

God hear my earnest prayers, in enabling me to perform this
' service he has called me to, so as may be for his glory, and
' the edification of his people.' s

* Memoirs, p. 12, 13, 14.

DR. LARDNER. IX

The religious world was at this time engaged in an import
ant controversy, relative to the Christian revelation. That of
which I am speaking had been begun by Mr. Woolston, who,
perhaps, was rather an enthusiast and a madman than an infidel.
JBy reading Origen, and other mystical writers, he had been
led to embrace the allegorical mode of explaining the scrip
tures, which, at length, he carried to a most extravagant and
ridiculous excess. After several absurd publications, he con
tended, in a tract, entitled, ' The Moderator between an
Infidel and Apostate,' to which two supplements were added,
that the miracles of our Lord were not real, or ever actually
wrought. For this work a prosecution was commenced against
him, in 1726, by the Attorney General ; but, in consequence
of Mr. Winston's intercession, it was laid aside. Mr.
Woolston was not induced by this indulgence to continue in
silence. He pursued the subject through the years 1727,
1728, 1729, and 1730, in six discourses, and two defences of
them ; in which he not only maintained the same principles he
had done in his * Moderator,' but treated the miracles of our
Saviour with a licentiousness, buffoonery, and insolence, that
had all the appearance, if not the reality, of malignant infidelity.
The prosecution therefore was renewed against him ; and,
being tried before Lord Chief Justice Raymond, he was
condemned to one year's imprisonment, and a fine of a hun
dred pounds.

A far better method of confuting Mr. Woolston was adopt
ed by many learned divines at that period. The pamphlets
written against him were, indeed, very numerous ; and among
the rest of the defenders of revelation, Mr. Lardner appeared to
no small advantage. His work upon this occasion, which was
published in the latter end of the year 1729, was entitled, * A
Vindication of Three of our blessed Saviour's Miracles, viz.
The raising of Jairus's Daughter, the Widow of Nairn's Son,
and Lazarus.' It was in answer to the objections of Mr.
A\roolston's fifth discourse, that this piece was composed.
Mr. Lardner had drawn it up for his own private satisfaction,
wthout any immediate view to publication ; and his modesty
was such, that for a time he did not think of printing it, be
cause his colleague, Dr. Harris, had subjoined to two dis
courses on the reasonableness of belief in Christ, and the
unreasonableness of infidelity, some brief remarks on the case
of Lazarus. It was to the advantage of the public that our
author changed his opinion. His vindication was undoubted
ly one of the best treatises which appeared in the controversy
with Mr. Woolston ; and it is no exaggeration to say, that it

X THE LIFE OF

abounds with admirable and judicious observations, and con
tains a complete defence of three of the most important of our
Lord's miracles. Accordingly, it was very favourably re
ceived by the learned world, and soon came to a second
edition.

Mr. Lardner was not one of those who approved of the
prosecution which was carried on against Mr. Woolston by the
civil magistrate. In his preface, therefore, he has made some
excellent remarks on the subject of free inquiry and discussion.
If men be permitted to deliver their sentiments freely in matters
of religion, and to propose their objections against Christianity
itself, he declares it to be his opinion, that there would be no
reason to be in pain for the event. ' On the side of chris-
' tianity/ says he, * I expect to see, as hitherto, the greatest
' share of learning, good sense, true wit, and fairness of dis-

* putation ; which things, I hope, will be superior to low
' ridicule, false argument, and misrepresentation.' He far
ther observes, that all force on the minds of men, in the matters
of belief, is contrary to religion in general, and the Christian
religion in particular ; and that severity, instead of doing good,
has always done harm. Dr. Waddington, at that time bi
shop of Chichester, who was highly pleased with the whole of
Mr. Lardrier's Vindication of the Three Miracles, was not
equally satisfied with his preface, and therefore wrote to him
upon the subject. To the bishop our author sent an answer,
which produced a second letter from his lordship, and a reply
in return. These four letters, which were written with great
mutual civility and respect, are given in the Appendix ; h and
it will now be little doubted, on what side lay the advantage of
the argument.

Another correspondent, occasioned by the Vindication of
the Three Miracles, was the Lord Viscount Barrington ; who
had made some remarks, and suggested some difficulties con
cerning the death of Jairus's daughter. These remarks are
unhappily lost ; but Mr. Lardner's letter in answer to them
is preserved, and will be found in the Appendix.' His lord
ship, who possessed a very enlightened mind on the subject
of religious liberty, highly approved of Mr. Lardner's preface ;
and the approbation of so good a judge was received by our
author with peculiar satisfaction. ' I have a great deal of

* reason,' says he, < to rejoice, that the manner in which the
' argument for free writing is managed in the preface, is not
' unacceptable to your lordship ; for as to the principles them-
' selves, I had no doubt but they would be agreeable to your

h Appendix, No. I. ' Appendix, No. II.

DR. LARDNER. xi

' judgment, however they may be suspected or disliked by

* others, who have less studied the Christian doctrine. A
' true Christian may suffer on account of his religion, but he
' earn never make others suffer on account of theirs : whatever
' may be the consequence of it, we are not to support christi-
' anity by force. Our blessed Saviour, rather than make use
' of compulsion, would choose to be without a follower/ John
vi.67.k

Though Mr. Lardner's time was chiefly employed in his
preparations for the pulpit, and in carrying on his great work,
he nevertheless found leisure to write other occasional pieces,
besides his Vindication of the Three Miracles. In 1730 he
sent a letter to Mr. La Roche, to be inserted in his Literary
Journal, a periodical work, which, besides giving an account
of books, admitted short original communications, consisting
of critical disquisitions and dissertations. The subject of the
letter was a difficulty concerning the omission of the history of
our Saviour's ascension, in the gospels of St. Matthew and
St. John, though it is related by St. Mark and St. Luke.
This difficulty our author has removed with his usual good
sense and discernment, as the reader may see by having re
course to the Appendix.1 In the same year he wrote his
Letter on the Logos. It was not composed with a view to
publication ; and indeed, was not published till nearly thirty
years after, when I shall have occasion to mention it again.
From a passage in the Vindication of the Three Miracles, I
collect that Mr. Lardner had very recently embraced the doc
trine advanced in the Letter, or at least had not long come to
a final determination on the subject. For in that passage he
asserts, that our Saviour ' descended from the height of glory
' he had with the Father.' m Or is it to be considered as an
incidental expression, which dropped from our author, though
he might for some time have had his doubts and difficulties
with regard to the pre-existence of Christ ?

In 1733 appeared the first volume of the second part of
' The Credibility of the Gospel History; or the PRINCIPAL

* Facts of the New Testament confirmed by passages from
' ancient authors, who were contemporary with our Saviour

* or his apostles, or lived near their time.' It was Mr. Lard
ner's original intention not to publish a part of the evidence
for the principal facts of the New Testament, until the whole
work was completed. But he was diverted from this purpose
by the importunities of his friends. He could have wished,

k Memoirs, ubi supra, p. 32. ' Appendix, No. III.

m See Vol. x. p. 38.

Xii THE LIFE OF

however, to have exhibited at once the whole evidence of the
two first centuries of Christianity ; but he thought it expedient
to break off sooner, that he might not render the volume of an
inconvenient size. Our author took this opportunity of ex
pressing his gratitude for the favourable reception which had
been given to the former part of his work. Besides its being
universally well received at home, it was so much approved
abroad, that it was translated by two learned foreigners ; by
Mr. Cornelius Westerbaen of Utrecht, into Low Dutch, and
by Mr. J. Christopher Wolff of Hamburgh, into Latin. * I
' cannot but esteem it,' says Mr. Lardner, ' as an uncommon
' happiness, that my thoughts have been so justly represented
' by persons well known in the republic of letters for composi-
' tions of their own.'

The testimonies produced and considered, in the first vo
lume of the second part of the Credibility, were those of St.
Barnabas, St. Clement, Hennas, St. Ignatius, St. Polycarp,
Papias, Justin Martyr, Dionysius of Corinth, Tatian, Hege-
sippus, Melito, St. Irenaeus, and Athenagoras. Our author
has also treated on a fragment called St. Clement's second
epistle, the relation of St. Polycarp's martyrdom, the evange
lists in the reign of Trajan, the epistle to Diognetus, and the
epistle of the churches of Vienne and Lyons. In the intro
duction he hath given an admirable summary of the history of
the New Testament. Among other proofs of approbation
and regard which Mr. Lardner received in consequence of
this publication, he could not avoid being pleased with the
following affectionate remarks by his learned and valuable
friend, the Rev. Mr. Joseph Hallet, jun. of Exeter. ' Your
new volume, with which you have now obliged the world,
will, I am persuaded, do much good service to the cause of
Christianity. You cannot be ignorant of my opinion of it,
from the conversation I had the honour to hold with you
about it in your study. — Your method, upon the whole,
pleases me much better than Mr. Jones's, because he hardly
ever does more than refer to chapter, verse, and page ;
whereas, you write the words of the text and of the quotation
at length ; and when he has a huddle of references, you, in
the case of Irenaeus, prudently choose one plain quotation
of each book of the New Testament cited by him. When
the work shall be all finished in that manner, it will be worth
its weight in gold, and all the Christian world will be obliged
to thank you for it.' n

In 1735, was published the second volume of the second
n Memoirs, ubi supra, p. 49.

DR. LARDNER. xiii

part of the Credibility of the Gospel History. The subjects
of this volume were, Miltiades, Theophilus of Antioch, Pan-
taenus, St. Clement of Alexandria, Polycrates, Heraclitus,
and several other writers near the end of the second century,
Hermias, Serapion, Tertullian, a number of authors who re
quired only to be shortly mentioned, and certain supposititious
writings of the second century ; such as the Acts of Paul and
Thecla, the Sibylline Oracles, the Testaments of the Twelve
Patriarchs, the Recognitions, the Clementine Homilies, and
the Clementine Epitome. Among these different articles,
those which relate to St. Clement of Alexandria and Tertul
lian are peculiarly important, and the remarks on the apocry
phal works are very curious arid useful. The farther Mr.
Lardner proceeded in his design, the more did he advance in
esteem and reputation among learned men of all denominations.
Even the adversaries to religion could not withhold their testi
mony to his merit. The noted Dr. Morgan, (afterwards the
writer of the ' Moral Philosopher,' in which revelation was
attacked with great virulence, and which hath received many
noble and satisfactory answers,) in a letter to our author, con
taining some objections to the first chapter of St. Luke's gos
pel, compliments him highly on his integrity, impartiality, and
candour. This letter, together with Mr. Lardner's sensible
and judicious reply, will be found in the Appendix.0

In November 1736, our author was attacked by another
severe and dangerous fever. The effects of it were such, that
he did not recover his health, so far as to be able to preach, till
late in the spring of 1737. In that year, he published his
* Counsels of Prudence for the use of young people ; a dis
course on the Wisdom of the Serpent and the Innocence of
the Dove : in which are recommended general rules of pru
dence ; with particular directions relating to business, con
versation, friendship, and usefulness.' This discourse was
generally and justly admired. Indeed it contains most excel
lent advice to young persons ; advice resulting from the union
of wisdom, integrity, and knowledge of the world, and which,
if followed, would be the best foundation of happiness, both
here and hereafter. If, from the mention of this discourse,
any single youth should be engaged so to attend to the direc
tions it contains, as to reduce them to practice, the present
Life of Dr. Lardner will have been written to a most valuable
purpose.

Dr. Seeker, bishop of Oxford, was highly pleased with the
Counsels of Prudence. In a letter to our author he expressed
0 Appendix, No. IV.

XJV THE LIFE OF

himself in the following terms : ' I am also in your debt for
those excellent Counsels of Prudence, which you published
some time ago, and would recommend it to you, to relieve
yourself now and then from your great work, and oblige the
world with some of these little pieces. One would hope
they might do a great deal of good in it. and I am sure there
is great need of doing every thing that can be done to pro
mote seriousness and mildness among men.' After giving
this testimony to Mr. Lardner's discourse, the bishop adds, that
the number of religious persons was dreadfully lessened, and
that those who remained were very far from preserving a due
moderation and charity one towards another. * I am very sorry,'
says he, * for faults of this kind, which we of the establishment
' fall into ; and too many of you, I fear, are not less faulty,
' though I do not take the spirit of some papers to be the spi-

* rit of the dissenters. May God make us all wiser and bet-
' ter ; and may he long preserve your health, dear sir, to be

* useful to his church.' Here Dr. Seeker had a reference to
the controversy which was then carrying on with regard to the
justice, propriety, and expediency of retaining or repealing
the corporation and test acts ; in which controversy, as is
usual in such cases, some warm things (and perhaps warmer
than was reasonable and prudent) might be advanced by se
veral of the advocates for the dissenters, as well as by their
opponents. In answer to the latter part of the bishop's letter,
Mr. Lardner wrote as follows : * I have not received any infor
mation concerning the writer or writers of the papers to which
your lordship refers. But I believe your lordship to be in the
right in supposing that there are many dissenters, by whom
they are not approved. So far as I know, the dissenters are
generally in a good temper. Some, indeed, were soured by
a late disappointment. And they were chiefly of those who
used to be reputed men of moderation and charity, and who
were far from being disaffected to the church of England.
For these, as it seems, were the men who were most earnest
in the affair : though all such did not engage in it with equal
earnestness. Perhaps this may deserve to be considered.' P
It is hence sufficiently apparent, that our author did not ap
prove of the refusal that had been given to the repeal of the cor
poration and test acts, though he has expressed himself with
his usual mildness of sentiment, and gentleness of language.

In 1738, Mr. Lardner was enabled to give the world the
third volume of the second part of the Credibility. This vo
lume carried the evidence down to the year 233, and included
P Memoirs, ubi supra, p. 66 to 68,

DR. LARDNER. XV

Minucius Felix, Apollonius, Cams and others, Asterius Ur-
banus, St. Alexander bishop of Jerusalem, St. Hippolytus,
Ammonius, Julius Africanus, Origen, and St. Firmilian.
Some of these articles are of great consequence, and I need
not inform my readers that this must be peculiarly the case
with respect to the account of Origen.

Our author, in the same year, drew up a paper, containing
* Remarks upon some difficulties concerning the Christian
doctrine.' These remarks were in answer to a friend, who
had made certain objections to the excellence and usefulness
of several of the precepts of our holy religion. Mr. Lard-
ner's paper, which is inserted in the Appendix, displays his
customary good sense, and sagacity of observation. ^

In 1739, there was only one publication by our author,
which was entitled, ' A Caution against Conformity to this
World.' It consisted of two discourses, which had been
preached from Romans xii. 2, and which may justly be con
sidered as a sequel to the Counsels of Prudence. The direc
tions and cautions given in these sermons will be found use
ful at all times ; and an attention to them would be highly
seasonable at present ; when, without indulging satirical
reflections upon the age, it may too truly be asserted, that
the influence of general custom and fashion, is not always
favourable to those dispositions and habits which are recom
mended by wisdom, piety, and virtue.

Early in January, 1740, appeared the fourth volume of the
second part of the Credibility. Our author began this volume
with an account of various writers of less note in the former
part of the third century, and then proceeded to the consider
ation of Noetus, and others who were called heretics at that
period; such as the Valesians, the Angelics, the Apostolics,
and the Origenists. But the volume was chiefly devoted to
St. Gregory, bishop of Neocaesarea ; Dionysius, bishop of
Alexandria ; and St. Cyprian, bishop of Cartilage. The two
last articles are very copious and curious.

On the 17th of January Mr. Lardner lost his father, who
departed this life in the 87th year of his age. With his wor
thy parent our author had resided ever since he had quitted
Lady Treby's family ; and how much he was affected by his
decease, will strongly be manifested from what he wrote upon
the occasion. ' I am,' says he, ' full of grief, and find it very
' difficult to bear up under the affliction. I entreat the Lord
' Almighty to be my father and protector, to support me, and
' to guide me in the remaining part of my life, so as that I
q Appendix, No. V.

XVI THE LIFE OF

may live to his praise and glory. I entreat and pray that he
will enable me to behave as a Christian, and one persuaded
of his fatherly care and protection ; and that this affliction
may be improved by me for my farther humiliation and re
pentance ; for engaging in a closer dependence on God ;
for quickening my preparations for another and better world/
e farther writes : * I find this affliction sit very heavy upon
me. My dearest brother, Richard Lardner, died in April
1733, some little time before I published the first volume of
the second part of the Credibility. The fourth volume
of this work was but published a few days before my father
died.'r

Considering the great age of old Mr. Lardner, that he had
been weakened for some years before by a paralytic disorder,
and that the deafness of his son must have been some obstruc
tion to their mutual conversation, it may perhaps be thought
that the grief which our author has expressed above was rather
too excessive. But whoever reflects upon the matter will be
sensible, that there must have been something very excellent
both in the father and son, and very engaging in their man
ner of living together, when a separation, which so long must
have been expected, could have been thus painful to the
survivor. Such parental and filial regard cannot but appear
beautiful and delightful to every well-regulated mind. Dr.
Lardner was finely attempered to the social affections ; and
he has recorded, in his Vindication of the Three Miracles,
that, for his own part, he never loved stoical principles or
dispositions.8

A character of old Mr. Lardner was drawn up by Mr. Neal,
and will be found in the Appendix. i It may be observed by
the way, that Mr. Richard Lardner, our author's only brother,
was a counsellor at law. They had but one sister, Elizabeth,
who was married to the Rev. Mr. Daniel Neal, now men
tioned ; a gentleman, who, not to speak of his other writings,
is well known to the learned world by his History of Eng
land, and still more by his History of the Puritans.

Mr. Lardner's excellent friend Mr. Hallet, entered deeply
into his feelings on the death of his father, and wrote him a
letter upon that event, which was full of sympathy and piety.u
On the 25th of May, in this same year, our author met with
another affliction, in the decease of his highly valued colleague,
Dr. William Harris. On this occasion, it naturally fell upon
him to preach the funeral sermon, which he did from 2 Thess.

* Memoirs, ubi supra, p. 87 to 89. s See vol. x. p. 45.

1 Appendix, No. VI. « Memoirs, ubi supra, p. 89 to 91.

DR. LARDNER. XVii

i. 10. In the discourse, which was printed, and will be
found in his works, he gave a high, and, I doubt not, a just
character of Dr. Harris. The Doctor was, indeed, for a great
number of years, a very eminent minister among the protes-
tant dissenters. He had been chosen pastor of the congrega
tion at Crouched Friars, in 1698, when he was only in the
23rd year of his age, and continued in that relation to his
death in 1740. It appears that he was a gentleman of various
accomplishments, being a man of the world as well as a scho
lar. In his writings he paid a greater attention to neatness
and elegance of composition than was done by some of his
brethren ; and his discourses on the Messiah have been held
in much reputation. A funeral sermon for him was likewise
preached and published by Dr. Grosvenor.

Soon after Dr. Harris's decease, Mr. Lardner had an una
nimous invitation to undertake the pastoral charge of the
Society at Crouched Friars, in conjunction with some other
minister of whom they should make a choice. Upon receiv
ing this invitation, he consulted with his friend Mr. Hallet,
who strongly urged him to accept of it ; and endeavoured to
remove the difficulties he might feel on that head, and espe
cially those arising from his deafness. Mr. Hallet wished him
to acquire a larger concern in directing the affairs of a con
gregation than he had hitherto done, and to appear at the
Fund, and other places, as one of the chief among the
dissenting ministers, according to his real deserts/ What
ever were Mr. Lardner's reasons, he declined taking a share
in the pastoral office. It is probable that his deafness con
tributed, among other causes, to this determination. In
November, Mr. (afterwards Dr.) George Benson was chosen
sole pastor of the Society, and our author continued as as
sistant preacher.

It was not till the year 1743, that Mr. Lardner was ena
bled to give to the public the fifth volume of the second part
of the Credibility. This volume comprehended St. Cornelius
and St. Lucius, bishops of Rome, Novatus, Dionysius bishop
of Rome, Commodian, Malchion, Anatolius, and three others,
bishops of Laodicea, Theognostus, Theonas bishop of Alex
andria, Pierius presbyter of the church of the same city, two
Doritheuses, Victorinus bishop of Pettaw, Methodius bishop
of Olympus in Lycia, Lucian presbyter of Antioch, Hesychius
bishop in Egypt, Pamphilus presbyter of Csesarea, Phileas
bishop of Thmuis in Egypt, Philoromus receiver-general at
Alexandria, Peter bishop of Alexandria, and the Milesians.
v Ibid. p. 91 to 95.
c

THE LIFE OF

In an advertisement, prefixed to the volume, our author ex
presses his apprehensions that some persons might be ready
to charge him with prolixity in the conduct of his undertaking.
But he hath offered such reasons for the method he has pur
sued, as will satisfy every reflecting mind. Among other
things, he observes, that the particular design of his work, was
to enable persons of ordinary capacities, who had not an op
portunity of reading many authors, to judge for themselves
concerning the external evidence of the facts related in the
New Testament. * I write,' says he, ' chiefly for gentlemen,
' and such others as are not possessed of large libraries ; and
' therefore I produce passages of ancient authors at length,

* and oftentimes transcribe also the original words at the bot-

* torn of the page, that this evidence may at once appear in a

* clear and satisfactory light/

In the same year the world was indebted to Mr. Lardner
for another valuable performance, the title of which was, * The
Circumstances of the Jewish. People an Argument for the
Truth of the Christian Religion.' It consists of three dis
courses on Romans xi. 11 ; in which the grand points insist
ed upon by our author, and maintained with great perspicuity
and success, are, that the present state of the Jews was fore
told by our Lord ; that it is agreeable to many prophecies in
the Old Testament ; that it affords reason to believe, that the
Messiah is already come ; that it furnishes an argument for
the divine authority of the gospel ; and that it exhibits an at
testation to divers things, upon which some evidences of
Christianity depend.

Mr. Lardner sustained this year a domestic affliction, in the
decease of his brother-in-law, the Reverend Daniel Neal,
M. A. ; and in the next year (1744) he had the calamity of losing
a most intimate and beloved friend, and a distant relation by
marriage, Dr. Jeremiah Hunt. This gentleman died on the
5th of September, and was justly lamented by many of the
most respectable dissenters in the city of London. Mr. Lard
ner preached his funeral sermon, from John xiv. 2 ; and hath
drawn his character at length, and with great affection. In
deed, he appears to have deserved every encomium. Among
his other qualities, he had an uncommon talent at communicat
ing instruction by conversation, which he carried on in so
perspicuous and pleasing a manner, that it mightily engaged
the attention and won the hearts of young people. I have
seldom known more enlightened and judicious Christians than
those who enjoyed, in early life, the friendship of Dr. Hunt.
The Doctor, whose learning was very extensive, and whose

DR. LARDNER. XIX

knowledge of the Scriptures was profound, entertained a great
contempt for infidels, who pretend to condemn revelation,
without ever having applied to it a careful study and consider
ation. Though they are apt to give themselves airs of superior
knowledge, he looked upon the whole body of them as a sort
of men, who had only a superficial acquaintance both with
scripture and antiquity. To this ignorance of theirs he in
part ascribed their infidelity ; for he used to assert, that all
antiquity confirms and corroborates revelation. w These sen
timents of Dr. Hunt have their foundation in reason. It
cannot, indeed, be denied, that a number of ingenious men,
of extensive knowledge in certain respects, are sceptical with
regard to religion. But then they have not examined this par
ticular subject with a becoming seriousness and impartiality.
They have not thoroughly studied the various external and
internal evidences which, have been urged in proof of Christ
ianity ; and especially, they have not searched into the Scrip
tures themselves, thence to deduce the real doctrines of the
gospel ; but have assumed their ideas of them, and conceived
a dislike to them, from the abstruse systems and formularies
which all establishments have adopted. Dr. Hunt had a
strong persuasion that the age succeeding that in which he
lived would be as remarkable for enthusiasm, as his own was
for infidelity. His prediction hath already, in some degree,
been accomplished. Enthusiasm hath strongly seized a part
of the people, while infidelity has prevailed among others ;
so that, betwixt them both, rational religion has suffered not
a little. But let not her friends be discouraged ; for, in the
due order of Providence, she will, I doubt not, revive with
fresh lustre and beauty, and at length draw all men after her.
In 1745, Mr. Lardner favoured the public with another
volume of his great work, being the sixth of the second part.
Excepting one chapter, relative to Archelaus bishop in Me
sopotamia, the whole volume was devoted to the Manichees ;
and the account of them is eminently curious and instructive.
When our author began his work, he declined writing the
history of the heretics of the two first centuries, because of
the difficulty of the subject, and for some other reasons ; not
intending to omit it entirely, but deferring it till another op
portunity. But when he came lower these reasons no longer
operated ; and, therefore, from the beginning of the fourth
volume, he introduced, as occasion offered, a number of wri
ters who were deemed heretical, and whose testimonies
contributed to his main design.

* See Vol. ix. p. 112. .;*
c 2

XX THE LIFE OF

In the same year, Mr. Lardner revised and published a
volume of posthumous sermons of the Rev. Mr. Kirby Reyner,
of Bristol. This was done at the request of the family ; and
in serving the family he did service to the cause of religion ;
for, if I am not mistaken in my recollection, Mr. Reyner's dis
courses are of that plain and practical nature, which renders
them excellently adapted for the use of common Christians.

It was in the beginning of this year, that Mr. Lardner re
ceived a diploma from the Marischal college of Aberdeen,
conferring upon him the degree of Doctor in Divinity. The
diploma was voted in the most obliging manner, and was ren
dered agreeable by its having the cordial and unanimous
signature of the professors of the college. This was an ho
nour which our author did not solicit, but which, when it was
bestowed upon him, he did not think it unbecoming in him to
accept : preserving herein the due medium, between seeking
for such a distinction, and despising it when offered. His own
remark, in the case of Dr. Hunt, deserves notice. ' In the
' year 1729,' says he, * the university of Edinburgh, out of a
"* regard to his distinguished merit, complimented him with
* the highest honorary title in their gift ; apiece of respect, not
' to be slighted by any man of letters.'* When we consider
Dr. Lardner's extraordinary attainments and learning, the
reflection which he made on receiving his degree, displayed
an extraordinary humbleness of mind. ' I pray God, ' said
he, ' I may not be elevated by any acceptance my labours
' meet with ; but that I may proceed with humility, diligence,
' and integrity, in the whole of my life. ?

With relation, in general, to this academical distinction, it
may be observed, that when it is conferred without merit, it
cannot give honour ; that when it is bestowed upon merit, it
becomes a proper mark of respect ; and that merit, untitled,
can shine by its own lustre. Though the friends of the late
Reverend Hugh Farmer did not procure for him a diploma,
his abilities and learning will carry down his name with repu
tation to posterity. The title of Doctor could not have added
to the celebrity of such men as Richard Hooker, John Hales,
Joseph Mede, and William Chillingworth, in the church of
England ; or of Matthew Poole, John Howe, and Richard
Baxter, among the dissenters.

Dr. Lardner, in 1746, was appointed one of the correspon
dent members at London of the Society in Scotland, for
propagating Christian knowledge, and protestant principles,
in the northern parts of that country, and the numerous islands
x See Vol. ix. p. 107. y Memoirs of Lardner, ubi supra, p. 96.

DR. LARDNER. XXI

which are situated near its coasts. This tribute of respect
was probably the result of some service or benefaction to that
excellent and useful Society.

Tn 1748, our author was engaged in superintending a new
edition of the two first volumes of the second part of the Cre
dibility ; and in the same year he published the seventh volume
of that part. The persons of whom an account was given,
and whose testimonies were recited in this volume, were Ar-
nobius, Lactantius, Alexander bishop of Alexandria, Arius
and his followers, and Constantine the Great, the first Chris
tian emperor. There were, likewise, two chapters on the
Donatists, and on the burning of the scriptures, in the time of
Dioclesian's persecution. It will appear from the names I
have mentioned, that most of these articles are of peculiar
importance. The character of Constantine is stated and es
timated with equal candour and judgment ; and the observa
tions on the story of that emperor's having seen in the heavens,
nearly at mid-day, the trophy of the cross, placed above the
sun, consisting of light, with an inscription annexed, BY THIS
CONQUER, are very sagacious and convincing. Credulity
not having been Dr. Lardner's foible, he was on that account
the more eminently qualified for the execution of the great work
he had undertaken. There was an Appendix to this volume,
in answer to some remarks which Mr. Jackson had made upon
our author's fifth volume, relative to the rise of Sabellianism,
and the name of Novatus. Whoever is disposed to look into
the Appendix, which in the present edition is subjoined to that
part of the Credibility to which it more immediately belongs,
will have little hesitation in determining on what side lay the
advantage of the argument.

This year Dr. Lardner lost his sister, Mrs. Elizabeth Neal ;
whose decease drew from him the following pious and affect
tionate reflections. ' I am the oldest of the three children which
God gave to my honoured parents. I am still preserved :
but now all worldly friendships fade, and are worth little. I
have lately published the seventh volume of the second part
of the Credibility : but a temper and conduct worthy the doc
trine of the gospel, are more valuable than any written de
fences and apologies for it, or explications of it. I beg that
I may be more and more possessed of that temper of humility
and meekness which shall bear good fruits : and I have great
reason to think of another world, and the change which I
must pass under. I cannot expect, any more, such
tenderness and affection as have been shown me by my

THE LIFE OF

4 father, mother, brother, and sister, now no more in this
' world/2

A new edition of the third volume of the second part of the
Credibility was called for in 1750 ; and in the course of the
same year appeared the eighth volume. This volume began
with the council of Nice, and then proceeded to Eusebius
bishop of Caesarea. The other persons and objects treated
of were, Marcellus bishop of Ancyra in Galatia, Eustathius
bishop of Antioch, Athanasius bishop of Alexandria, a dia
logue against the Marcionites, Juvencus, Julius Firmicus Ma-
ternus, Cyril of Jerusalem, the Audians, Hilary of Poictiers,
Aerius, the council of Laodicea, Epiphanius bishop in
Cyprus, and the Apostolical Constitutions and Canons. In
this volume, the two first articles are of peculiar importance.
At the conclusion of the account of the council of Nice, are
some admirable reflections on the conduct of that council,
and on the pernicious effects of introducing subscriptions, au
thority, and force, into the Christian church. In the history
of Eusebius, which is very copious, we meet with a number
of excellent observations concerning the divisions of the sacred
books, the character of the writers of them, and the employ
ment of the apostles, and apostolical men. AVith these bishop
Seeker was highly pleased ; but he was not equally satisfied
with what our author had advanced in relation to the council
of Nice. The letter which his lordship wrote to Dr. Lardner
upon the occasion, together with the Doctor's answer, may be
seen in the Appendix. a Dr. Seeker's letter marks the turn
of his mind, and will furnish matter of reflection to the curious
reader, who has a talent at discerning the nice discriminations
of character.

In this same year, our author published a volume of ser
mons, the subjects of which are entirely of a practical nature.
These sermons, as might be expected from Dr. Lardner, are
very judicious and instructive, and the perusal of them cannot
fail of being acceptable and useful to candid and serious
Christians. Our author having presented these discourses,
together with the. eighth volume of the Credibility, to Dr.
Doddridge, that gentleman wrote a letter of acknowledgment
in return, which is inserted in the Appendix. b Dr. Dod-
dridge's letter is rather curious ; partly as it displays some
thing of the sentiments and disposition of that excellent man ;
and partly as it exhibits a small foible in his character, which

1 Ibid. p. 97. * Appendix, No. VII. b Appendix, No. VIII.

DR. LARDNER. Xxiii

was that of representing with too much parade the various
employments and business wherein he was engaged.

Dr. Lardner, in 1751, resigned the office of morning
preacher at Crouched Friars. His reasons for this determi
nation were, the continuance and even increase of his deaf
ness, the smallness of the morning auditory, and the importance
of redeeming time for carrying on his long work. Dr. Benson,
whom he had acquainted by letter with his purpose of resig
nation, wrote thus to him in return. * I was so much affected,
' on Monday evening, upon reading your letter, that I had very
' little sleep that night ; and my mind still remains greatly af-

* fected with the thoughts of parting with you. For though
' I cannot but own I feel the weight of your reasons, yet I
' must frankly tell you, I do not expect ever to have an assist-

* ant in whom I can place so thorough a confidence, and for
' whom I can entertain so warm an affection, and so high an
' esteem. I thank you heartily for all your friendly, kind, and
' obliging treatment of me, especially since I came to Crouched
' Friars : and I earnestly desire that our friendship may nev7er

* be interrupted. ' e

Our author, adhering to his resolution, preached his last
sermon on the 23rd of June ; having been assistant at
Crouched Friars nearly twenty-two years. His farewell dis
course was taken from 2 Cor. iv. 18. " While we look not
at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not
seen ; for the things which are seen are temporal, but the
things which are not seen are eternal. " These words af
forded a fine subject for the conclusion of Dr. Lardner's pious
and faithful labours in the pulpit. In a letter written to him
by a friend, in 1748, are some observations, concerning his
character as a preacher, and the cause of his not being gene
rally acceptable, which it may not be amiss to transcribe.
' It has often grieved me to see so few persons attend your
' public administrations, and puzzled me to assign a reason for
' it. When I consider the simplicity, propriety, and purity
' of your language; the justness of your sentiments ; the im-
' portance of the subjects you handle ; the seriousness and

* solemnity that animates every part of your performances ;
' that you never meddle with any of the disputable points that

* divide and alienate protestants ; nay, have treated even
' popery itself in such a manner as shows you to be indeed an
' imitator of the meekness and gentleness of Christ ; what
' can be the reason ? I can think of none but this, that there
' is some little imperfection in your speech. Your voice is

e Memoirs, ubi supra, p. 107.

XXIV THE LIFE OF

naturally strong, clear, and agreeable ; but it is not difficult
to perceive, in forming some sounds, that the organs of
speech are weak. But I take this to be the least part of the
defect ; which, from long and careful observation, I think
consists in two things, viz. Indistinctness, or slipping over
now and then a word or syllable ; or running them too close
together, especially at the end of a sentence ; and usually
at the same time lowering your voice. This is most re
markable in your prayer, less so in your sermon, and still
less in your reading.' d

It is certain, that Dr. Lardner's mode of elocution must
have been very unpleasant. That, from his early and extreme
deafness, he could have no such command of his voice, as to
give it a due modulation, those who were personally acquaint
ed with him well knew. When to this it is added, that he
dropped his words greatly in the pulpit, it cannot be a matter
of surprise that he was not popular. Some few judicious
persons, who could raise their minds above all external ad
vantages, admired him extremely : but such hearers can never
be numerous.

The ninth volume of the second part of the Credibility
appeared in 1752. In the preface to it our author assigns
the reason why, with regard to a few names, he had been
obliged to transgress the order of time. He was desirous
that Ephrem the Syrian should be in the former volume ; and
the chapter was completed as far as it could be done from
the Greek edition of his works at Oxford, and the two first
volumes of the edition then begun at Rome. But Dr. Lard-
ner having been informed that the remaining volumes of the
Roman edition might be expected in a short time, he deter
mined to wait for them ; and they did not come to his hands
till several months after the publication of the eighth volume.
Ephrem being laid aside, he took Epiphanius ; and the
Apostolical Constitutions naturally followed, which requiring
a long chapter, some other articles, of smaller consequence,
were for the present excluded. The persons treated of in
the ninth volume were, Rheticius bishop of Autun, Triphyl-
lius, Fortunatianus, Photinus, Eusebius bishop of Vercelli,
Lucifer bishop of Cagliari in Sardinia, Gregory bishop of
Elvira, Phaebadius bishop of Agen, Caius Marius Victorinus
Afer, Apollinarius bishop of Laodicea, Damasus bishop of
Rome, Basil bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, Gregory Na-
zianzen, Amphilochius bishop of Iconium, Gregory bishop
of Nyssa in Cappadocia, Didymus of Alexandria, Ephrem
d Memoirs, p. 107 to 109,

DR. LARDNER. XXV

the Syrian, Ebedjesu, Pacian bishop of Barcelona, Optatus
of Milevi, Ambrose bishop of Milan, Diodorus bishop of
Tarsus, Philaster bishop of Brescia, Gaudentius bishop
of the same city, Sophronius, and Theodore bishop of
Mopsuestia, in Cilicia. There is, also, a long and curious
chapter concerning the Priscillianists, and a shorter one re
lative to a Commentary upon thirteen of St. Paul's epistles,
ascribed by many to Hilary deacon of Rome. To this
volume were subjoined, ' Remarks upon Mr. Bower's account
of the Manichees, in the second volume of his History of the
Popes.' Mr. Bower had retailed the common calumnies
with regard to these heretics, which are refuted by our author
with his usual candour, good sense, and knowledge of anti
quity. The remarks, in the present edition, are annexed to
the history of the Manichees. In this year (1752) a second
impression was called for, of the Discourses on the Circum
stances of the Jewish People.

The next year produced the tenth volume of the second
part of the Credibility ; in which the persons treated of are
few in number, but very important with respect to their
character, works, and testimony. They are Jerom, Rufinus,
Augustin bishop of Hippo Regius in Africa, and John
Chrysostom bishop of Constantinople. A short chapter is
introduced, on the Third Council of Carthage. Two other
publications came from Dr. Lardner in the same year. The
first was * A Dissertation upon the two Epistles ascribed to
Clement of Rome, lately published by Mr. Wetstein ; with
large extracts out of them, and an argument showing them not
to be genuine.' At the close of this judicious and elaborate
dissertation, our author has made some observations concern
ing the design of his great undertaking, which the reader will
probably not be displeased with perusing. ' When, ' says he,
* tidings were first brought hither, that Mr. Wetstein had re-
' ceived two new epistles of Clement out of the East, several
' of my friends and readers signified their desire, that when
' they should be published, I would observe the testimony
' therein afforded to the books of the New Testament ; which
' service I have now performed, according to my ability.
' They supposed it to be a necessary part of the work, in
' which I have been long employed : which is not barely a
' bibliotheque of ecclesiastical authors, or memoirs of ecclesi-
' astical history, but was begun, and has been carried on,
' with a view of showing the truth of the Christian religion ;
' particularly, the truth and credibility of the evangelical his-
' tory, and the antiquity, genuineness, and authority of the

XXVI THE LIFE OF

books of the New Testament, the original records of the
doctrine and miracles of our Saviour and his apostles. And
all along great care has been taken, to distinguish genuine
from supposititious writings ; which I now reflect upon with
much satisfaction. In this method, witnesses, when pro
duced, appear in their true time and character ; and every
one is able to judge of the value of their testimony.'
The other production of Dr. Lardner which came out in
1753, appeared without his name, and was entitled, ' An Essay
on the Mosaic Account of the Creation and Fall of Man.'
By the misfortunes of the bookseller, almost the whole im
pression was lost ; so that, in the present edition, it has the
recommendation of novelty. Our author adopts the literal
sense of the history of our first parents, and, after having
critically explained the narration, deduces from it a variety of
important observations.

Dr. Lardner was now drawing to the conclusion of the
second part of the Credibility. In 1754, the eleventh volume
of it was published, containing a succinct history of the princi
pal Christian writers of the fifth, sixth, and following centuries,
to the beginning of the twelfth century ; with their testimony
to the books of the New Testament. The persons introduced
in this volume were more than forty in number, it not being
necessary to make the articles so large and particular, as had
been requisite at a more early period. An Appendix was
added, giving an account of the ecclesiastical histories of
Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret.

It had begun to be suggested by some persons, that our
author had carried down his testimonies lower than was need
ful to the purpose of his main argument. But such a sugges
tion was not the result of a due consideration of the matter.
The Rev. Dr. Henry Miles, of Tooting, an eminent dissenting
minister, and a respectable member of the Royal Society,
expressed his sentiments to Dr. Lardner upon the subject in
so judicious a manner, after reading the eleventh volume, that
they well deserve to be inserted. ' I thank God,' says he,
'who has enabled you to finish your design in a collection of
' ancient testimonies, &c. for the service of the Christian
' cause ; the benefit of which the present generation and
' future ages will reap. The more I consider the characters
' of the writers cited by you, in the former and this volume,
' the more am I satisfied you did right to bring your work
' down so far as you have done. Those who have been or
' are otherwise minded, do not seem to me to have well con-
' sidered the distance of time at which we are removed from

DR. LARDNER.

' the period to which your last volume reacheth ; nor how far
* it was necessary to preclude the cavils and exceptions, which
' our enemies, and their successors, may be ready to make to
' the truths of the Gospel History : nor is it considered, that
' the distance will be continually growing. For my part,
' (setting aside the consideration of your principal view,) I
' cannot help looking upon it as a very useful and desirable
' undertaking*, if we regard it as a branch of ecclesiastical
' history ; of which we have nothing in our language that can
' render it unnecessary ; and, moreover, if we consider it as
' containing a variety of important instructions, which no
' careful reader can overlook, in the characters and conduct
' of the writers, mentioned by you. Sure I am, this lesson
' all may naturally be taught ; how absolutely necessary it is
' for us to regard the inspired writings as the rule of our faith
' and practice, and not the dictates or conduct of fallible men
' in former or later ages/ e

As such a quantity and variety of matter were compre
hended in our author's great work, an epitome of it became
very desirable, to assist the recollection of the memory, and to
display in one view the force of the argument. Accordingly,
this was undertaken by Dr. Lardner himself, who, in the
twelfth and last volume of the second part, which Avas pub
lished in 1755, gave a general review of his design, and an
admirable recapitulation of the eleven preceding volumes,
with some new additional observations. Lists were added, of
various readings, and of texts explained ; together with an
alphabetical catalogue of Christian authors, sects, and writings,
and an alphabetical table of principal matters.

About this time, Dr. Lardner, in conjunction with Dr.
Chandler, Dr. John Ward, and the Rev. Mr. Edward San-
dercock, was engaged in perusing, and preparing for the press,
some posthumous dissertations of the Rev. Mr. Moses Low-
man, a learned dissenting minister at Clapham. Various
works were written by this gentleman, among which three
have been held in considerable esteem by the public. These
are, a Treatise on the Civil Government of the Hebrews,
another on the Ritual of that People, and a Commentary on
the Revelations. He wrote also a short piece, drawn up in
the mathematical form, to prove the being and perfections of
God by the argument a priori. Dr. Chandler, in his funeral
sermon for Mr. Lowman, asserted that it was an absolute de
monstration. Perhaps it came as near to it as any thing that
has been written upon the subject : but I dare not pronounce
e Memoirs, ubi supra, p. 110, 11 1.

Xxviii THE LIFE OF

that there is no flaw in the reasoning, or that it will produce
undeniable conviction. It was as an author that Mr. Lowman
excelled, and not as a preacher. His discourses in the pulpit
were so obscure, that a gentleman of great intelligence, one
of his congregation, said he could never understand him.

Early in the spring of the year 1756, I had the happiness of
commencing an acquaintance with Dr. Lardner, and the ho
nour of its being sought for on his side, in consequence of the
favourable opinion which his candour had led him to form of
me, from the first sermon I ever printed, on the advantages
of religious knowledge. *In the same year the Doctor pub
lished the first and second volumes of the Supplement to the
Credibility of the Gospel History. It fell to my lot to be the
monthly reviewer of these volumes ; and the accounts which I
gave of them were so fortunate as to obtain our author's ap
probation. He did not know, at the time, from whom they
came. To what circumstance it was owing that the review
of the work was consigned to me, I cannot now recollect, it
not being till long after, that I could with any justice have
been deemed a periodical critic. When the third volume of
the Supplement appeared, which was in 1757, Dr. Lardner
himself drew up a short and simple statement of the contents of
it, which was inserted in the Review, with a slight addition by
way of encomium ; for nothing that had the least tendency to
praise came from his own pen.

The first volume of the Supplement contained general ob
servations upon the canon of the New Testament, and a
History of the Four Evangelists, with the Evidences of the
Genuineness of the Four Gospels, and the Acts of the Apos
tles, and an Examination of the Times in which these books
were written. There is, likewise, a chapter concerning the
time when the Apostles left Judea, to go arid preach the
Christian Religion to other countries ; which event, our au
thor thinks, could not have taken place until after the council
at Jerusalem. He concluded the volume with a discussion of
the question, whether any one of the first three Evangelists
had seen the gospel of the others before he wrote his own ?
and here Dr. Lardner hath determined, with great appear
ance of reason and argument, that St. Matthew, St. Mark,
and St. Luke, did not abridge or transcribe from each other,
but are distinct, independent, and harmonious witnesses.
The second volume comprehended the history of St. Paul,
displayed the evidences of the genuineness of his fourteen
Epistles, particularly that to the Hebrews, and ascertained
the times in which they were written. Through the whole

DR. LARDNER. XXlX

were interspersed many curious remarks ; and the two con
cluding chapters were employed in showing, that the Epistle
inscribed to the Ephesians was actually addressed to them,
and that the churches of Colosse and Laodicea were planted
by St. Paul. In the third volume the seven Catholic Epis
tles, and the Revelation of St. John, were considered, and
histories given of St. James, St. Peter, and St. Jude. The
order of the books of the New Testament is examined, and
proofs afforded that they were early known, read, and made
use of by Christians. In conclusion, it is shown, that there is
no reason to believe that any of the sacred books of the New
Testament have been lost.

It would not be easy to say too much in praise of the Sup
plement to the Credibility. The several questions discussed
in this work are determined in consequence of a depth of in
vestigation, and an accuracy of judgment, which are highly
worthy of admiration. It is remarkable, that in various points
the opinions of our author are very different from those which
his former colleague, Dr. Benson, maintained, in his History
of the Acts of the Apostles, the prefaces to his Paraphrases,
and the dissertations annexed to them. True criticism, we
believe, will usually decide in favour of Dr. Lardner.

I cannot avoid strongly recommending the Supplement to
the Credibility to the attention of all young divines. Indeed,
I think that it ought to be read by every theological student
before he quits the university or academy in which he is edu
cated. There are three other works which will be found of
eminent advantage to those who are intended for, or begin
ning to engage in, the Christian ministry. These are Butler's
Analogy, Bishop Law's Considerations on the Theory of Re
ligion, and Dr. Taylor's Key to the Apostolical Writings,
prefixed to his paraphrase on the epistle to the Romans.
Without agreeing with every circumstance advanced in these
works, it may be said of them, with the greatest truth, that
they tend to open and enlarge the mind ; that they give im
portant views of the evidence, nature, and design of revela
tion ; and that they display a vein of reasoning and inquiry
which may be extended to other objects besides those imme
diately considered in the books themselves.

It must not be forgotten, that the Supplement to the Credi
bility has a place in the excellent collection of treatises in
divinity, which has lately been published by Dr. AVatson,
bishop of Landaff. For a collection which cannot fail of
being eminently conducive to the instruction and improve
ment of younger clergymen, and for the noble, manly, and

XXX THE LIFE OF

truly evangelical preface by which it is preceded, this great
prelate is entitled to the gratitude of the Christian world.

May I not be permitted to add, that there is another
collection which is still wanted : and that is, of curious and
valuable small tracts, relative to the evidences of our holy
religion, or to scriptural difficulties, which by length of time,
and in consequence of having been separately printed, are
almost sunk into oblivion, or, if remembered, can scarcely at
any rate be procured ? The recovery of such pieces, and the
communication of them to the public, in a few volumes, and
at a reasonable price, would be an acceptable, as well as an
useful service to men of inquiry and literature.

The Supplement to the Credibility of the Gospel History
completed one grand part of Dr. Lardner's design, which was,
to produce, at large, the testimonies of Christian writers to the
books of the New Testament. What he had already execut
ed had employed him thirty-three years ; and it was contrary
to his expectation that his life was spared to the accomplish
ment of so much of the eminently important scheme which he
had in view. Providence, however, preserved him for still
further usefulness. There was one part of his plan which he
never carried into effect. It Avas his intention to allege the
testimonies of Christian writers, not only to the books, but
also to the principal facts of the New Testament, such as the
birth, miracles, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, the
mission of the Apostles, and the miracles wrought by them :
to which were to be added such considerations as might give
weight to these testimonies, and confirm their truth. This
our author designed to be the second book of the second part
of the Credibility, and he supposed that it might be comprised
in a single octavo volume ; on which account it is rather the
more surprising that it was not completed. Perhaps, upon
reflection, he might judge, that almost every thing which he
wished to say in this respect, would be found in the volumes
already published.

This year, (1757,) Dr. Lardner, in conjunction with the
Rev. Mr. Caleb Fleming, revised for publication, and intro
duced with a preface, a posthumous tract of Mr. Thomas
Moore, entitled, 'An Enquiry into the Nature of our Saviour's
Agony in the Garden.' Mr, Moore was a woollen-draper, in
Holy well-street, near the Strand, a thinking man, and stu
dious in the scriptures. The design of his pamphlet was, to
account for our Lord's agony, from the series of events which
befell him during the latter part of his ministry, without sup
posing it to have been the result of any preternatural inflictions.

DR. LARDNER. XXXI

In the year 1758 appeared two productions from the pen
of our author. The first was, ' The Case of the Demoniacs,
mentioned in the New Testament ; being four discourses upon
Mark v. 19, with an Appendix for the further illustration of
the subject.' Dr. Lardner, in this work, maintains the hypo
thesis which was supported by Mr. Joseph Mede in the last
century, by Dr. Sykes and others in the present, and still
more recently, in a very elaborate manner, by the late Rev.
Hugh Farmer. This scheme, which supposes the demoniacs
to have been only diseased or lunatic persons, and not actually
possessed by evil spirits, seems to gain ground : and will pro
bably be found to be most agreeable, not only to the principles
of sound philosophy, but to the genuine language of antiquity
and scripture, when rightly understood. The Treatise on the
Demoniacs having been considered by our author as an Ap
pendix to the first part of his Credibility, relative to the facts
occasionally mentioned in the New Testament, is subjoined
to that work in the present edition.

The other publication of Dr. Lardner's this year, was a
short one, without his name, the title of which was, ' A Let
ter to Jonas Hanway Esq. ; in which some reasons are
assigned, why houses for the reception of penitent women,
who have been disorderly in their lives, ought not to be called
Magdalen Houses.' Mary Magdalen, as our author shows,
was not the sinner who is recorded in the seventh chapter of
St. Luke, but a woman of distinction and excellent character,
who for a while laboured under some bodily indisposition,
which our Lord miraculously healed. To call, therefore, a
hospital for repenting prostitutes a Magdalen House, was,
he thought, a great abuse of the name of a truly honourable
and valuable woman. If Mary's shame had been manifest,
and upon record, she could not have been worse stigmatized.
Such was the delicacy of Dr. Lardner's mind, that, indepen
dently of the case of Mary Magdalen, he disliked the use of
the word " prostitutes," in the title of a place of reception
for females who had been of bad characters. Speaking of
a proper inscription, he says, * I shall propose one, which
is very plain :" A Charity House for Penitent Women:
which, I think, sufficiently indicates their fault ; and yet is,
at the same time, expressive of tenderness, by avoiding a
word of offensive sound and meaning, denoting the lowest
disgrace that human nature can fall into, and which few
modest men and women can think of without pain and un
easiness. Or, if that title is not reckoned distinct and
particular enough, with a small alteration it may be made,

THE LIFE OF

' for Penitent Harlots.' f The letter to Mr. Hanway produc
ed no effect ; and perhaps it came too late. Besides, though
the highest regard ought ever to be paid to the memory of
that gentleman as a most excellent and philanthropic citizen,
he was not, I believe, easily disengaged from what he had
once adopted.

In 1759, Dr. Lardner published, but without his name, *A
Letter written in the year 1730, concerning the question,
Whether the Logos supplied the place of a human soul in the
person of Jesus Christ.' To this letter, which I have men
tioned before, and which is supposed to have been originally
addressed to Lord Barrington, were now added, ' two Post
scripts : the first containing an explication of those words, the
Spirit, the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of God, as used in the
Scriptures : the second, containing remarks upon the third
part of the late bishop of Clogher's Vindication of the Histo
ries of the Old and New Testament.' In this treatise our
author opposes the Arian hypothesis, to which he acknow
ledges that he had once, for a while, been much inclined, but
which he now entirely disliked, thinking it to be all amazing
throughout, and irreconcileable to reason. The point which
he labours to prove is, that Jesus is a man appointed, anointed,
beloved, honoured, and exalted by God above all other beings.
It is observable, that Dr. Lardner did not derive his opinions
upon this subject from the study of the Socinian authors.
I have not,' says he, * been greatly conversant with the writ
ers of that denomination. I have never read Crellius de
uno Deo Patre ; though I believe it to be a very good book.
There is also, in our language, a collection of Unitarian
Tracts, in two or three quartos. But I am not acquainted
with it, nor can I remember that I ever looked into it. I
have formed my sentiments upon the scriptures, and by
reading such commentators, chiefly, as are in the best repute.
I may add, that the reading of the ancient writers of the
church has been of use to confirm me, and to assist in
clearing up difficulties.' e In the preface, our author de
clares, that though he is not without a just concern for such
things as appear to him to be of importance, he hopes the
whole is written in the way of reason and argument, with
meekness and candour, without acrimony and abuse. The
truth of this declaration will not be denied by those who dis
agree the most with Dr. Lardner ; and surely it is not saying
too much to add, that he has displayed great knowledge of
the Scripture, and of scriptural phraseology. His intimate
f Vol. x. p. 248. s Ibid, p. 77, 78, 104, 105.

DR. LARDNER. XXX111

friend Mr. Hallet did not adopt his opinion ; and several
letters were exchanged between them on the subject. Their
different views with regard to what they apprehended to be
divine truth, did not, however, produce the least diminution
in their mutual affection. One of Mr. Hallet's letters was
concluded in terms which reflect honour on his character.
' The consideration of these matters/ says he, ' is so far from
' lessening my friendship and regard for you, that I reverence
' and esteem you more than ever ; and you shall never find me
' say one word inconsistent with the highest respect and
' friendship. — May God long preserve your usefulness ! ' h

I do not recollect that the letter on the Logos made any
great impression at the time of its first publication. The
sentiments advanced in it were then confined to a few persons ;
and others were not readily disposed to embrace them. It is
not necessary to inform my readers, that a period of less
than thirty years has produced a surprising alteration in this
respect. The fact is equally allowed by those who rejoice in,
and by those who deplore, the progress of Socinianism.
What are the doctrines of the New Testament, with regard
to the person and pre-existence of Christ, is the grand con
troversy of the day ; a controversy that is warmly agitated,
and which is not likely to be soon brought to a conclusion.
Were I to indulge to the observations which arise to my mind
on this occasion, I should be led into a digression incompa
tible with my present undertaking. If Providence should
spare my life, it is my wish, when certain pressing engage
ments are discharged, to impart to the public a few candid
reflections on some late, and indeed still subsisting theological
disputes. I cannot, however, dismiss the subject, without
remarking the coincidence of opinion which sometimes takes
place between persons extremely different in their religious
professions and connections. The celebrated Father le Cou-
rayer, author of the Dissertation on the Validity of English
Ordinations, continued to the end of his life in the communion
of the Roman Catholic Church. Nevertheless, in the decla
ration of his last sentiments on the doctrines of religion,
recently published, he has delivered such views of things
respecting the Trinity, as Dr. Lardner himself must have
highly approved. The passage is so striking, and breathes so
liberal a spirit, that I shall insert it below. *

h Memoirs, ubi supra, p. 113.

1 The doctrine of the unity of God, so true, and so evident, has served for a
pretext to many, to try to inspire aversion at Christianity, as if it affected this
truth by its doctrines of the Trinity, and the Incarnation. The writings of

d

Xxxiv THE LIFE OF

A second volume of Sermons, on various subjects, was
published by our author in 1760. The discourses in this

some of the fathers, and the wretched philosophy of the schools, may, in fact,
have given ground to some people to draw such a consequence : but there is
nothing in the gospel which does not tend, on the contrary, to confirm us
more and more in the knowledge and worship of one God ; and nothing is
less opposite to this truth than the doctrines which are thought to destroy it
effectually.

Of all the modes of explaining the doctrine of the Trinity, I know of none
more contrary to the true doctrine of Christianity, than that which supposes in
the Deity an existence of three substances distinct, however collateral, however
subordinate. It is, in my apprehension, to re-establish Polytheism, under the
pretext of explaining a mystery. The unity of God is the foundation of the
gospel ; and every thing that may in any way affect this truth is dangerous.
As Jesus Christ and his apostles have laboured, on the one hand, to reclaim the
gentiles from the belief and from the worship of many gods, and have supposed,
on the other hand, that the Jews thought soundly in the article of Deity, in
which they never distinguished different substances ; it seems to me a departure
from the simplicity of the gospel, and a voluntary inclination to corrupt the
idea of a clear truth, by singular explications, which it becomes necessary to
abuse at least, in order to combat.

I believe, therefore, that there is but only one God ; that his Spirit is not a
substance distinct from him ; and that Jesus Christ, to whom divinity was very
intimately united, is his Son in virtue of that union. This is all the Trinity
that I find in the gospel ; and I cannot conceive that any other Trinity can
accord with the Unity of God. I know that many ancient writers have had
recourse to the multiplication of substances, to give us an idea of this mystery ;
and others have imagined other systems, more philosophical than evangelical,
that have less served to clear up this matter than to obscure it. But I distin
guish these systems from that of the gospel : and, inasmuch as I find this last
worthy of respect, it therefore appears to me little essential to adopt notions
which often have much obscurity, and sometimes are even involved in con
tradiction.

The Incarnation has nothing any more contrary to the doctrine of the Unity
of God, than the Trinity. Accordingly, it is extremely remarkable, that nei
ther Jesus Christ nor his apostles have ever represented to us these mysteries as
including incomprehensible things, and which it was impossible to reconcile
to reason. God, willing to draw men from their errors and to purify them
from their sins, filled Jesus Christ with his wisdom, invested him with his
power, communicated to him his authority, and gave him his spirit, a not by
measure, as to the prophets, but united himself so intimately with him, that
Jesus Christ appeared in the form of God ; b that he was made Lord and
Christ;0 Prince and Saviour;*1 that he was filled with wisdom and with
grace ; e that all the fulness of the godhead resided corporeally in him ; f and
that he received the glory, the honour, the virtue, the strength, and the bless
ing, of his Father; * who, by the participation which he gave him of his power
and authority, made him enter, at the same time, into a participation of his
glory, in such a manner, that he who honours the Son, honours the Father
who sent him. h Thus God, referring always every thing to himself, and not
terminating in Jesus Christ, who is no otherwise regarded than as the organ
and the instrument of the mercy of his Father, is always God alone, who is the

a John iii. 34. b Phil. ii. 6. c Acts ii. 36. d Acts v. 31.

e Luke ii. 40. f Coloss. ii. 9. « Apoc. v. 12. h John v. 23.

DR. LARDNER. XXXV

volume, though always applied to practical purposes, are
more curious and critical than those which he gave to the

object of our adorations j and there is nothing that shocks us in conceiving,
that he can communicate himself to a man as fully, and as intimately, as he
judges it necessary for his own glory, and for the salvation of mankind.

This is the explication of that intimate union of divinity with humanity in
Jesus Christ, which, perfectly simple as it is, has so much divided all Christen
dom. From a willingness to find, in this intimate union of divinity with
humanity in Jesus Christ, all that we experience in the union of the body with
the soul, we have been thrown into embarrassments and contradictions, which
it is impossible either to explain or to conciliate. We talk of hyposlasies, of
personalities, of idioms, and of every thing that a dark philosophy could
imagine, to render things credible, of which it was unable to give us any notion.
Some have made a ridiculous mixture of the divinity with the humanity.
Others, in discriminating too nicely the difference, have seemed to place Jesus
Christ only in the rank of ordinary prophets. Hence the Nestorianism, the
Eutycheism, the Apollinarism, and the Monothelisme, which have excited such
fatal schisms in the church, and which have perhaps as much favoured the
progress of Mahometanism in the east, as the ignorance of these nations, and
the victorious arms of the Saracens.

To avoid these excesses, we must abide in the simplicity of the gospel, and
content ourselves with acknowledging, that God, to bring the world back to his
knowledge and to his worship, gave birth to Jesus Christ in a miraculous man
ner, and united himself to him in a way the most close and intimate, so that
it might be said, that Jesus Christ was in God,' and God in him; that all
that appertained to the Father k was in the disposition of the Son, by the com
munication which the Father had given him of his power ; that he had resign
ed all judgment to him ;l that, as the Father could raise the dead to life, the
Son could do so also ; m that the doctrine of Jesus Christ was not his own, but
that of his Father who sent him ; n that he was only the same thing with him j°
that it was the Father who abode in him, and who did all his works ; P in one
word, that he was the Son of God,q because, that God, on sending him into
the world, had sanctified him to such a degree, that he who saw him/ saw his
Father, and that he who believed in him, believed also in God.

When one has once acknowledged the truth and the holiness of the gospel,
all this doctrine concerning the person of Jesus Christ appears to me so simple,
that I cannot conceive how it was possible to corrupt it by so many explica
tions, which are good for nothing but to make Christianity appear less reason
able, and full of contradictions. In consequence of a continual desire to find
new mysteries, an infinitude of imaginations have been consecrated ; and it is
still more lamentable that these imaginations are become a part of religion, by
the authority of some, and by the acquiescence of others ; so that a man
passes for an unbeliever, or an irreligious person, if he does not subscribe to the
predominant system, and if he happen to have too much understanding to
submit to received prejudices, or too much fortitude to be overawed by violence.
It is not so much the person of Jesus Christ as his doctrine, that is the object
of the Christian religion ; and though we ought to honour the Son as we ho
nour the Father, because he had his mission, and was clothed with his autho
rity, it is, however, to God only that Jesus Christ reclaims our attention ; and
he assumes no other consequence to recommend himself to the Jews, than as
having been sanctified by his Father, to come and announce his doctrine, and
j John x. 38. k John xvii. 7, 10. l John v. 22.

m John v. 21. ,n John-vii. 16. ° John x. 30.

PJohnxiv. 10. 1 John x. 36. r John xi. 44, 45.

(1 2

XXXvi THE LIFE OP

world ten years before. Several important circumstances,
relative to the history of our Saviour, and the doctrines of the
gospel, are considered and explained ; and it would not be
easy to find in the same compass, a greater treasure of Chris
tian knowledge. This year a second edition was demanded
of the eleventh volume of the Credibility, and of the two first
volumes of the Supplement. The fifth volume had been re
printed in 1756, and the fourth and sixth in 1758.

Deeply engaged as Dr. Lardner was, in preparing his own
works for the press, he could not resist the solicitations which
were made to him to revise occasionally the productions of
other persons. About this time, at the request of his friend,
Mr. Caleb Fleming, he corrected the manuscript of 'A Cri
ticism upon modern notions of Sacrifices ; being an examina
tion of Dr. Taylor's Scripture Doctrine of the Atonement,
examined.' The author of the tract here mentioned, was a
Dr. Richie, a physician, and a dissenting minister, somewhere
in the north of England. By the same gentleman was after
wards published, in two volumes, quarto, an elaborate work
concerning the peculiar doctrines of revelation, relating to
piacular sacrifices, redemption by Christ, and the treatment
of moral characters by the Deity. It was the production of
a man who had applied himself diligently to the study of the
scriptures, and who has taken immense pains to ascertain his
own views of things ; notwithstanding which, it is now little
known, and still less read. The different fate of books would
furnish matter for a curious and a copious disquisition.

Another work, the manuscript of which Dr. Lardner re
vised, at the desire of the writer, for whom he had a particular
esteem, was a Treatise on the true Doctrine of the New Tes
tament concerning Jesus Christ. This treatise, which has
come to a second impression, was the composition of the Rev.
Mr. Paul Cardale, a dissenting minister at Evesham, in
Worcestershire. It is introduced by a long discourse on free
inquiry in matters of religion, and contains a full defence of
what is called the Socinian scheme. I believe that it has
been of some considerable influence in drawing over persons
to the author's opinion. Mr. Cardale, I remember, is very
large in endeavouring to show, that the great blessings of the
gospel do not depend upon the question concerning our Lord's
pre-existence ; and that no stress is laid upon it, in the account
which is given in the New Testament of the benefits we de-

to instruct us in truths unknown to the Gentiles, and very much altered by the
Jews.— Le Courayer's " Declaration of his last Sentiments on the different
Doctrines of Religion." The English Translation, p. 14—26.

DR. LARDNER. XXXVli

rive from our divine Master. A sentiment which I should
earnestly wish to be generally impressed is, that the glory of
our holy religion stands firm on every scheme. Writers are
apt to express themselves, as if the Christian revelation would
be of little value, unless their particular systems are adopted:
but this is a kind of language which is extremely injudicious,
and which ought to be avoided and discouraged. The apostle
St. Paul, speaking of Jesus Christ, saith : " Who of God is
made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification,
and redemption." k To this account of things every chris-
tian, of every denomination, gives a most ready and cordial
assent. But can any man be said to think meanly of the
evangelical dispensation, or to detract from its excellence and
dignity, who believes that God is the author of it, that it was
communicated by Jesus Christ, and that he conveys to us
knowledge, pardon, holiness, and eternal life ? These are
blessings of unspeakable importance ; blessings which render
the gospel a pearl of invaluable price : and such it will be
esteemed by all who assent to its truth and divine authority,
whatever sentiments they may embrace concerning matters
of more doubtful disputation.

In 1761, and 1762, Dr. Lardner condescended to make
some communications to a periodical work, then carrying on,
entitled ' The Library,' which consisted entirely of original
pieces, and was conducted by some of the younger dissenting
ministers of the city of London. His papers, which were
four in number, are inserted at the end of the volume of tracts,
in the present collection. l A new edition of the tenth volume
of the second part of the Credibility came out in 1761, and
of the twelfth volume in 1762. Not again to resume the sub
ject, it may here be mentioned, that the eighth volume was
reprinted in 1766.

It was in 1762 that our author published his ' Remarks on
the late Dr. Ward's Dissertations on several Passages of the
Sacred Scriptures ; wherein are shown, beside other things,
that St. John computed the Hours of the Day after the Jew
ish Manner ; who are the Greeks, John xii ; who the Gre
cians, Acts vi ; the Design of the Apostolic Decree, Acts xv ;
that there was but one sort of Jewish Proselytes ; wherein
lay the Fault of St. Peter ; and how St. Paul may be vindi
cated.' Of these remarks it is sufficient to say, that they
display Dr. Lardner's usual skill in whatever relates to the
critical knowledge of the New Testament. He has particu
larly confuted the notion of two kinds of proselytes, which had
k 1 Corinth, i. 30. ' Vol. x. of this edition.

XXXVlii THE LIFE OF

not only been adopted by Dr. Ward, but which, for some time
before, had been a favourite opinion with Lord Barrington,
Dr. Benson, and other writers, so as to lead them into various
mistakes. A long- intimacy had subsisted between Dr. A^ard
and our author; and accordingly, throughout the whole of his
remarks, he has treated the memory of his friend with the
greatest regard and respect.

Dr. Lardner, in 1764, communicated to the world, without
his name, some strictures on another eminent New-Testament
critic, Dr. James Macknight, who had recently published his
Harmony of the Four Gospels. The arrangement of the cir
cumstances relative to our Lord's resurrection, had for seve
ral years engaged the attention of Christian writers. Mr.
Gilbert West had treated the subject very much at large,
and was supposed to have thrown great light upon it, by
having recourse to a different interpretation of some of our
Saviour's appearances, recorded by the evangelists, from
what had hitherto been given. A new vein of criticism was
opened by him, which was pursued by other persons. Dr.
Macknight, in particular, bestowed extraordinary labour upon
the matter, in the conclusion of his Harmony. The efforts of
his ingenuity arid diligence had not the good fortune to satisfy
Dr. Lardner. It appeared to him, that certain suppositions,
which had been made by Dr. Macknight, were altogether
without foundation. He thought proper, therefore, to pub
lish, in a letter to the author, Observations upon his Harmony,
so far as related to the History of our Saviour's Resurrection.
It cannot be denied that this tract is a piece of masterly
criticism. The account which is given in it, of the various
appearances of our Lord after his resurrection, comes recom
mended by such a simplicity of truth, as calls for the warmest
approbation. I have reason to believe, that there were other
points in which Dr. Lardner did not agree with Dr. Mack-
night. In matters liable to difficulty, and involved in some
degree of obscurity, a diversity of sentiments will take place
between the most upright, able, and serious inquirers after
truth.

Amidst these various productions of a smaller nature, Dr.
Lardner continued the prosecution of his grand object. Ac
cordingly, soon after the publication of his Observations on
Dr. Macknight's Harmony, and in the same year, he gave to
the world, in quarto, the first volume of 'A large Collection
of ancient Jewish and Heathen Testimonies to -the Truth of
the Christian Religion.' This volume contained the Jewish
testimonies, and the testimonies of heathen authors of the first

DR. LARDNER. XXXix

century. In the preface, Dr. Lardner has given an account
of those who had gone before him in the same design ; from
which account it will appear, that the subject, comparatively
speaking, had hitherto been but imperfectly considered. As
he was apprehensive that his work might be charged with
prolixity, he has made an apology for it, which must effectually
silence every objector. ' I am,' says he, ' to be distinct and
particular. These things have already been slightly touched
upon by many. I propose to enlarge, and set them in a
fuller light. I allege passages of ancient authors at length :
I settle their time : I distinguish their works, and endeavour
to show the value of their testimonies. I intend likewise to
allege the judgments of divers learned moderns, who have
gone before me in this service. All the persecutions of this
time are a part of my subject, as they were appointed by
edicts of heathen emperors, and were carried on by heathen
governors of provinces, and officers under them. I shall
have an opportunity to show the patience and fortitude
of the primitive Christians, and the state of Judaism, gentil-
ism, and Christianity in the four first centuries. As most of
the authors to be quoted by me are men of great distinction
in the republic of letters, some occasions will offer for criti
cal observations, which cannot be all declined : but nice and
intricate questions will be carefully avoided, that the whole
may be upon the level with the capacities of all who are in
quisitive, and disposed to read with attention.' Such is our
author's representation of his purposes ; and it will be almost
deemed superfluous to add, that they are executed with the
greatest accuracy, learning, candour, and judgment.

The heathen testimonies, considered in the first volume,
were, the pretended epistle of Abgarus, king of Edessa, to
Jesus, and the rescript of Jesus to Abgarus ; the knowledge
which the emperor Tiberius had of our Saviour Jesus Christ;
a monumental inscription concerning the Christians in the
time of Nero ; Pliny the elder ; Tacitus ; Martial ; Juvenal ;
and Suetonius. But this volume began with, and was chiefly
employed upon, the Jewish Testimonies : among which the
famous historian Josephus is the principal object. The third
chapter, relative to the fulfilment of our Saviour's predictions
concerning the destruction of the temple and the city of Jeru
salem, and the miseries of the Jewish people, is of peculiar
importance ; and accordingly it has justly obtained a place in
Bishop Watson's collection. It was a necessary part of Dr.
Lardner's plan, to examine the celebrated passage with regard
to the Lord Jesus Christ, which is now found in all the copies

xl THE LIFE OF

of Josephus. This passage therefore, our author has discussed
with his usual sagacity and diligence ; and he has pronounced
it to be an interpolation. Dr. Samuel Chandler, who was
not convinced by what he had advanced upon the subject,
wrote to him a letter on the occasion, to which he returned a
short answer. The letter and the reply may be seen in the
Appendix. m Several learned writers among us were dis
posed, about this time, to maintain the authenticity of the
passage in question. Dr. Chapman had done it in his Euse-
bius. The same cause had been defended by Dr. Nathaniel
Foster, in a .dissertation published at Oxford, in 1749. Nor
is it without very eminent support in the present day. Mr.
Bryant has exerted all the efforts in vindication of the passage,
which ingenuity and literature could supply : he has done every
thing but producing conviction. I have been favoured with
a letter from the Rev. Mr. Henley, of Rendlesham, in Suffolk,
containing a communication from the Abbe de Voisin, and
some observations by the late Abb6 Bullet, relative to the
testimony of Josephus, which I insert with great pleasure in
the Appendix. n

. Without taking it upon me to decide concerning the au
thenticity of this famous passage, I must be permitted to re
mark, that it can never be of any real advantage in a
controversy with the enemies of our holy religion. Of what
avail can it be to produce a testimony so doubtful in itself,
and which some of the ablest advocates for the truth of the
gospel reject as an interpolation ? An infidel must revolt at
such an argument. It ought, therefore, to be for ever dis
carded from any place among the evidences of Christianity,
though it may continue to exercise the ingenuity and critical
skill of scholars and divines.

The second volume of the Collection of Jewish and Hea
then Testimonies appeared in 1765 ; containing the heathen
testimonies of the second century. In the preface to this
volume, some farther observations were made upon the para-

fraph in the works of Josephus, concerning our blessed
aviour. Dr. Foster's dissertation, and Dr. Chandler's pri
vate letter, furnished the occasion for these additional obser
vations ; in which our author strenuously defends his former
opinion. The persons treated of in this volume are, Pliny
the younger, and Trajan ; Epictetus the stoic philosopher,
and Arrian ; the emperor Adrian ; Bruttius Pnesens ; Phle-
gon, Thallus, and Dionysius the Areopagite ; the emperor
Titus Antoninus the pious ; the emperor Marcus Antoninus the
in Appendix, No. IX. " Appendix, No. X.

DR. LARDNER. xli

philosopher ; Apuleius ; the early adversaries of Christianity,
and particularly Celsus ; Lucian of Samosata ; Aristides the
sophist ; Dion Chrysostom ; and Galen. Of the chapters re
lative to these persons, the longest and most important are
those concerning Pliny, Marcus Antoninus, and Celsus. Who
ever peruses them, will find in them a noble treasure of curious
and valuable information. I cannot forbear transcribing a
short passage, from the article on Pliny and Trajan, which
beautifully displays the candid mind of Dr. Lardner. The
evidence before him had obliged him to say some things that
are unfavourable to Trajan's character ; after which he adds :
' It ought not to be thought by any that I take pleasure in
' detracting from the merit of those who have been distin-
' guished by their high stations, or their eminent abilities, or
' their useful services to mankind of any sort. For, indeed,
' the disadvantageous part of this detail has been made, and
' carried on, not without great reluctance, much diffidence,
' and tenderness ; whilst commendable things have been cheer-
' fully acknowledged. And if we now think, and judge, and
' act better than many in former times, it is owing to our su-
' perior advantages ; such especially as we have received from
' the Christian Revelation, by which our minds have been
' enlightened and enlarged : for which we ought to be ever
' thankful, still thinking modestly of ourselves, and giving
' God the glory of all.'0

The third volume of the Collection of Testimonies was
published in 1766, containing an account of the heathen wri
ters and writings of the third century, whence arguments may
be deduced in support of the truth of the Christian religion.
This volume, which extended to the conversion of Constantine
the Great, abounded, like the two former ones, with much va
luable information. The persecutions to which the professors
of the gospel were exposed, and particularly that under the
emperor Dioclesian, are here amply considered. A peculiar
attention is likewise paid to Porphyry, and to his objections
against the authenticity of the book of Daniel. In the chap
ter that relates to Diogenes Laertius, our author has introdu
ced a very curious Criticism on the Altar to the Unknown
God, at Athens, which is mentioned in the Acts of the Apos
tles.

The fourth volume of the Testimonies appeared in 1767.

In this volume were contained the testimonies of heathen

writers of the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries ; to which was

added, the state of gentilism under Christian emperors.

0 See the present edition of Dr. Lardner's works, Vol. vii. p. 71.

Xlii THE LIFE OF

Among the persons who here passed in review before Dr.
Lardner, Julian, Ammianus Marcellinus, and Libanius, are
particularly distinguished. The accounts of these, and of
contemporary authors, are very entertaining ; though, as wit
nesses in favour of our holy religion, they are not so import
ant as Celsus, and other writers of an earlier period. Never
theless, they deserve to be collected, and to be put together
in their proper order. Hence our author had an opportunity
of displaying the last struggles of expiring gentilism, and of
relating some attempts to restore it, after it had been for a
while exploded with scorn and disdain. He has, likewise,
introduced to the acquaintance of his readers, not a few men
of great learning, and fine abilities, who were still tenacious of
the ancient rites, and fond of all the fables upon which they
were founded, and by which they had long been upheld and
encouraged.

In the copious article concerning Julian, a very important
point came under Dr. Lardner's consideration, which was, the
account of that emperor's attempt to rebuild the temple at
Jerusalem, and of the defeat of the attempt, by a divine and
miraculous interposition. This account has been given not
only by three contemporary Christian writers, Gregory Nazi-
anzen, Chrysostom, and Ambrose, but also by the heathen
historian Ammianus Marcellinus. It is mentioned, likewise,
by Rufinus, Socrates, Sozomen, Theodoret. and other ancient
authors. Accordingly the story has obtained an almost uni
versal credit ; and scarcely any learned man had dared to
suggest a doubt concerning it, excepting Basnage, in his
History of the Jews. It is well known that Bishop War-
burton wrote a very elaborate treatise in defence of the mira
cle ; and that this treatise has been esteemed one of his capital
productions, in point of j udgment as well as of literature. Dr.
Lardner, however, after the fullest examination, was obliged
to hesitate upon the subject. His difficulties he has stated
with his usual simplicity and candour ; and it must be ac
knowledged that the considerations proposed by him have
great weight. Perhaps many who read them will be induced,
for the future, to lay but little stress upon a narration, which
has heretofore been so generally admitted. I need not say
that our author had no intention to weaken the evidences of
Revelation. He was influenced by nothing but that sacred
and impartial regard to truth which he maintained in all his
inquiries. Some of the reflections which occur in his criti
cism will probably here be read with pleasure, as they finely
display the temper of his mind. ' Let not any be offended,'

DR. LARDNER. xliii

' says he, ' that I hesitate about this point. I think we
* ought not too easily to receive accounts of miraculous inter-
' positions, which are not becoming1 the Divine Being. There
' are many things said of Julian, which all wise and good men
' do not believe. — The truth of history is not at all affected
' by rejecting improbable relations. Nor is the cause of
' Christianity at all hurt, by our refusing to assent to some
' things which Christian writers have said of Julian. That
' he pretended favour for the Jews, and sometimes talked of
' rebuilding their city and their temple, is allowed. But that
' he actually attempted it and ordered money for the work out
' of the public treasury, when he was setting out upon the
' Persian expedition, and that his attempt was frustrated by
' many miraculous interpositions, is not so certain. Though
' these things should be contested or denied, it can be of no
' bad consequence. Other histories, which are void of the like
' improbabilities, are not affected by it. And the evangelical
' history remains firm and inviolate, having in it all possible
' marks of truth and credibility.

' Finally, to put an end to these critical observations. Ju-
' lian's favourable regards for the Jewish people, and his in-
' tention (or desire at least) to rebuild the city of Jerusalem,
1 and the temple there, are manifest, and fully attested by
' contemporary witnesses, and by his own writings. It is as
' manifest, that his design to rebuild Jerusalem and the Jewish
' temple, was never accomplished, but was frustrated and de-
' feated. Whether it was owing to miraculous interpositions,
' or to his expensive preparations for the Persian war, and
' other circumstances of his affairs, and to his death and defeat
' in that war ; the overruling providence of God ought to be
' acknowledged in the event. And the argument for the truth
' of the Christian religion, taken from the fulfilment of our
' Saviour's predictions in the destruction of Jerusalem, and
' the overthrow of the Jewish people by Vespasian and Titus,
' and their continued dispersion, remains in all its force. It
' is an argument which I never intended to weaken : it is, I
' think, a demonstrative argument for the truth of the Christian
' religion ; and, as I have often hinted in this work, deserving
' the attentive regard and serious consideration of all mankind/ P

The fourth volume of the collection of Jewish and Heathen
Testimonies completed another capital part of our author's
original design. It was published ten years after he had
finished his Credibility ; so that this grand object, with the
interruption arising from some smaller productions, occupied
P Testimonies, Vol. vii. p. 619, 621.

THE LIFE OF

him daring the space of forty-three years. A reflection pre
sents itself on this occasion ; which is, that works of great
consequence are not of speedy execution. Although Dr.
Lardner led a very retired life ; though he entered but little
into public business ; though he was a stated minister only
twenty-one years, and that but once a-day ; yet we see how
long a time he was employed, and diligently employed, in ac
complishing the end he had in view. Those who are not
themselves engaged in important and extensive literary under
takings, can have but an imperfect conception of the difficulties
to be surmounted, the disappointments to be incurred, the
books to be procured and waited for, the dates to be settled,
the facts to be ascertained, and the various other causes which
often occasion delays, that must be far more unpleasant to the
writer than they can possibly be to any reader whatever.

Though our author's life and pen were so ardently devoted
to the public good, he never received any thing that could de
serve to be regarded as a recompense for his labours. The
salary he had, whilst he continued to be a preacher, was very
inconsiderable; and his works were often published by him to
his loss, instead of his gain. This was particularly the case
with respect to the latter volumes of the Credibility. At
length he parted with the copy-right of that performance,
together with all the remaining printed copies of it, for the
trifling sum of a hundred and fifty pounds. Such a sum was
by no means an equivalent for the expenses he had incurred ;
but he consented to the agreement, in the hope that the work
would be rendered more extensively useful, when it became
the immediate interest of the booksellers to promote its sale. 1
From the scarcity of the separate volumes, and the immense
price to which complete sets of the Credibility have since
arisen, it is to be presumed that these gentlemen have had no
reason to repent of their bargain. As to Dr. Lardner, his
work is with the Lord, and his reward with his God.

AVhilst our author submitted patiently to various disadvan
tages, in order to serve the interests of truth and virtue, and
to maintain the truth of the Christian religion, he was not in
sensible that he had not met with the support and encourage
ment to which he was entitled. He particularly complained
of the neglect of the rich dissenting laity, in purchasing his
volumes. r This I remember his having once mentioned to

q Memoirs, ubi supra, p. 129.

r That excellent and munificent citizen, Thomas Hollis, Esq. must be ex
empted from this charge. In 1764, Dr. Lardner requested him, by letter, to
subscribe to his Collection of Heathen and Jewish Testimonies. Upon this

DR. LARDNER. xiv

me in a letter ; in which he took notice, that he had never re
ceived any mark of favour from the. dissenters ; ' not,' said he,
' so much as a trust.' He here referred to Dr. Daniel Wil-
liams's charities and library, the trustees of which consist of
thirteen ministers and ten lay gentlemen. It was not to the
honour of that body, that Dr. Lardner was never chosen to be
one of their number. His deafness, I believe, was considered
as an objection, but surely without sufficient reason ; for no
person could have been better qualified to give advice on most
occasions, and especially with reference to books. If I had
not believed that his nephew, Mr. Nathaniel Neal, was influ
enced by a principle of extreme delicacy, I should have
thought him somewhat to blame in the affair. That gentleman
was not only a trustee, but agent for the trust, and had a
great sway in all its concerns. If, therefore, he had intimated,
that the election of his uncle would be a desirable measure, it
could scarcely have met with an objection. I should be un
willing to suppose that any little bigotries, with regard to Dr.
Lardner's theological sentiments, contributed to his being
neglected. It is certain that no such narrowness of spirit is
found in the present trustees.

The last work of our author, that was published during his
life-time, was the fourth volume of his Testimonies. As,
however, some posthumous pieces of his have since made
their appearance, I shall mention them in this place. There
came out, in 1769, Memoirs of the life and writings of Dr.
Lardner, to which were annexed, eight sermons upon various
subjects. The four first of them had by himself been tran
scribed for the press. On the fifth and sixth, though not
fairly transcribed, he had written as follows; ' Perused, and,
' so far as I am able to perceive, all is right ; and I humbly
' conceive ought to be published.' These two discourses are
on the internal marks of Credibility in the New Testament,
and are admirably worthy of perusal. They are sermons
which he had preached in 1723 and 1724, at the Tuesday
evening lecture, and contain, in some degree, the outlines of
his great work, and especially of that part of it which relates

application, Mr. Hollis sent the good man a bank-note of twenty-pounds,
which the Doctor told to a friend, was the greatest sum he had ever received
from any of his benefactors. a There can be no doubt but that several of the
wealthy dissenters purchased our author's writings, though this was not done by
them so generally as might have been expected, and as the merit of the works
deserved.

a Memoirs of Thomas Hollis, Esq. Vol. I. p. 253.

xlvi THE LIFE OF

to the facts occasionally mentioned in the Evangelical and
Apostolical writings.

In 1776 was published a short letter, which our author had
sent in 1762, to Mr. Caleb Fleming, upon the Personality of
the Spirit. It was printed at the end of Mr. Cardale's En
quiry whether we have any Scripture Warrant for a direct
address either to the Son or to the Holy Ghost.

It was a part of Dr. Lardner's original design, with regard
to the Credibility of the Gospel History, to give an account
of the heretics of the two first centuries. To this arrange
ment, therefore, of his collections upon this subject he applied
himself, after he had finished his Heathen and Jewish Testi
monies ; but he did not live to complete his intentions. Some
parts, indeed, of the work were fitted for the press, having
received his last corrections ; whilst in other parts only a few
hints were written. It was doubted, for a time, whether the
progress he had made in his undertaking was sufficient for it
to be laid before the public. However, upon mature delibera
tion, his papers were put into the hands of the Rev. Mr.
Hogg, a worthy, learned, and judicious dissenting minister
at Exeter, who, in the additions which he made to Dr. Lard
ner's materials, did not introduce a relation of any person,
excepting where the Doctor himself had drawn up a part of
it, or had left some hints or references. In consequence of
Mr. Hogg's revisal and assistance, there appeared, in 1780,
in one volume, quarto, ' The History of the Heretics
' of the two first centuries after Christ : containing an
' account of their time, opinions, and testimonies to the
' books of the New Testament. To which are prefixed, ge-
* neral observations concerning Heretics.' Though this
volume is not, upon the whole, so valuable and important
as some of the former ones, it is possessed, nevertheless, of
very considerable merit. It recites the testimonies of here
tics, rectifies a variety of mistakes concerning them, and
refutes many groundless charges to which they were exposed,
from the ignorance, false zeal, and bigotry of their adversaries.

The last posthumous publication written by Dr. Lardner
appeared in 1784. It is entitled, * Two Schemes of a Trinity
considered, and the Divine Unity asserted.' This work
consists of four discourses upon Philippians ii. 5 to 11. The
first represents the commonly received opinion of the Trinity,
the second describes the Arian scheme : the third treats ori
the Nazarean doctrine ; and the fourth explains the text ac
cording to that doctrine. Our author had himself transcribed
these sermons for the press, with particular directions designed

DR. LARDNER. xlvii

for the printer. The manuscript having come into the pos
session of Mr. Wiche, a very respectable dissenting minister,
of the Baptist persuasion, at Maidstone in Kent, he gave it
to the public. Even those who are far from agreeing in
sentiment with Dr. Lardner, have applauded the candour, the
simplicity, and the love of truth, which these discourses evi
dently discover. Indeed, they are chiefly estimable for the
temper and spirit with which they are composed. It was not
to be expected that they could contain much new matter,
on points which, of late years, have been so frequently and
copiously discussed.

Providence spared the life of Dr. Lardner to a long term ;
and, his hearing excepted, he retained, to the last, the use of
his faculties, in a remarkably perfect degree. At length, in
the summer of 1768, he was seized with a decline, which car
ried him off in a few weeks, at Hawkhurst, the place of his
nativity, and where he had a small paternal estate. He had
been removed thither, in the hope that he might recruit his
strength by a change of air, and relaxation from study. The
day of his decease was the twenty-fourth of July, in the eighty-
fifth year of his age. His remains were conveyed to town,
and deposited in Tindal's burying-ground, commonly called
Bunhill Fields. At his particular request, no sermon was
preached on occasion of his death. s Thus did his modesty
and humility accompany him to the last moment of his earthly
existence. Some time after his decease, a stone was erected
to his memory, with an English inscription.

In looking back upon the life and character of Dr. Lard
ner, and comparing them with those of other men, we shall
find few names that are more truly entitled to be remembered
with veneration and applause. The sincerity of his piety has
been seen in a variety of circumstances, which I have had
occasion to mention. Indeed, a regard to God appears to
have been ever the governing principle of his actions. His
piety, too, was of the most rational kind, being founded on
just and enlarged views concerning the nature of religion.
What his ideas were in this respect will be found in many
parts of his writings, and may be discerned in two extracts
from letters of his to Lord Barrington, which are inserted
below. *

s Memoirs, ubi supra, p. 136.

1 The Extracts are as follows:

* I have ever had a good deal of curiosity, which, I apprehend, usually accom
panies a love of truth. But I have learnt a necessity of restraining, or at least
of regulating and governing that curiosity. The capacities of men are limited,
snd even small in comparison of the whole compass of things. The most

xlviii THE LIFE OF

Correspondent to our author's piety was his love of truth,
as is manifest from the whole of his works. No one seems

important matters ought to be preferred. A few certain principles are better
than a great many, if only obscure and uncertain. When evidence is not full
and clear, it is best to suspend and doubt. Religion is the concern of all men ;
it ought therefore to be clear and plain. And obscure religion is of little or no
value : indeed, it seems to be one of the greatest absurdities that can be con
ceived . If God make a revelation, intended for the general benefit of mankind,
one would expect it should be clear. We find in the Old-Testament predic
tions of a dispensation, under which men should not need to teach one another,
saying, " Know the Lord : for all should know him, from the least to the
greatest." I have a strong persuasion that the gospel was plain at first. It is
contained in the four gospels and Acts, which are plain books. If Christianity
is not plain now, I apprehend it must be our own fault, some way or other.
A doctrine that contains plain directions of duty, and plain promises of a re
ward, sufficient to encourage to duty in all circumstances, to strengthen against
temptations, to give comfort under afflictions, to calm the affections, and can
be easily proved to be certain, is indeed an excellent doctrine. This is true
religion. This is a pearl of great price, a treasure indeed, for which a man
may reasonably part with all that he has to buy it. I say, easily proved to
be certain. But it requires a sincere and honest disposition. Such a mind,
with good instruction, will learn more in a few hours, than the prejudiced and
selfish in an age. Indeed, such as these can never receive the truth, unless
mixed with other matters that subvert it.

" I am the more discouraged in the pursuit of speculations in matters of reli
gion, because I observe our blessed Saviour (who knew all things) and his
apostles enter not into many particulars of the future life, and deliver no ab
stract notions about any thing, nor say any thing whatever to gratify mere
curiosity, but only matters of the utmost consequence to the happiness of men.
I have also observed, that the obscure and difficult principles of the philoso
phers, the great variety of opinions they had, and the uncertainty of them,
were great defects in their philosophy, and objections against it. And I have
been not a little concerned to see the state of Christianity among us resemble
so much the state philosophy was in at the time the Christian religion first ap
peared in the world. There is still the more reason for those who sincerely
desire the interest of religion, to keep to plain, certain truths, if possible; because
of the prodigious, the almost universal indolence of mankind, who continually
catch at every thing, that may countenance their neglect of inquiry and exa
mination ; who seek nothing but this world, how they and their families may
enjoy ease, riches, and grandeur. For all which reasons, it may be best not
to advance any obscure and uncertain matters in religion ; or, if for some spe
cial reasons they are advanced, that they be proposed as uncertain and doubtful,
and that little stress be laid upon them."

In a subsequent letter, he thus writes :

" A principal occasion of my writing as I did about curiosity, was, (as far
as I remember,) the subject-matter of debate or inquiry, the future reward of
good men. I apprehend some ill consequences from too nice and curious in
quiries about that, since God has not plainly revealed to us, as I supposed, the
place of that happiness. But whatever I said about curiosity, I never intended
to discourage a diligent and careful search after truth. There is scarce any
thing more disagreeable and offensive to me, than the common indolence of
mankind about religion, and truth in general. And therefore another reason
why I spake against needless inquiries, was, because I feared that the render
ing religion abstruse and difficult, and multiplying questions in divinity,

DR. LARDNER. xlix

ever to have preserved a greater impartiality in his inquiries,
or to have been more free from any undue bias. He followed
truth wherever it led him ; and for the attainment of truth he
was admirably qualified, both by the turn of his disposition
and his understanding. With a mind so calm and unprejudic
ed, with a judgment so clear and distinct, he could scarcely
fail of forming right apprehensions concerning most of the
subjects which the course of his studies enabled him to inves
tigate.

The candour and moderation with which Dr. Lardner
maintained his own sentiments, constituted a prominent fea
ture in his character. Those he differed from in opinion, he
always treated with gentleness and respect ; and in the con
troversies he carries on with them, there is no severity of
censure, no harshness of language. This circumstance is the
more worthy to be mentioned and applauded, as it is so
different from what we often meet with in the present day.
Many of our writers seem to be reverting to that abuse of
each other, which was common among scholars some time after
the revival of literature. They are not satisfied without cast
ing illiberal reflections on the persons of the men whose tenets
they oppose, and arraigning the motives of their conduct.
What renders this disposition the more ridiculous is, that it
is frequently exerted on the most trivial occasions. Appre
hended mistakes in philology, or diversities of judgment in
matters of mere taste, are treated with as great a bitterness as
if they were crimes of the deepest dye. How much more
beautiful, and more worthy of imitation, was the manner of
conducting disputable questions which was pursued by Dr.
Lardner ! Such a method will be found, in the end, more
favourable to the diffusion of truth, and more conducive to a
lasting reputation. Circumstances, indeed, may arise, in
which a sharpness of chastisement may appear to be justifi
able. Uncommon insolence and uncommon bigotry may
deserve to be strongly exposed : and yet, even here, a manly
neglect and contempt of unmerited censure may be the most
honourable and the most useful mode of behaviour.

Benevolence, as well as piety, entered deeply into Dr.
Lardner's character. Though his retired life prevented him
from taking a very active part in public designs, he was ready
to promote every good work. To persons in distress he was

(especially in those things which are of importance,) might be improved by
mankind, as a pretence to countenance their lazy and indolent disposition. *

* Memoirs of the Life and Writings of Dr. Lardner, p. 130—134.

1 THE LIFE OF

ever willing to contribute, to the highest degree which his
fortune would admit. On some occasions he exerted himself
with great vigour and success. When a gentleman came to
London, in 1756, to solicit contributions towards building a
church for the protestants of Thorn in Poland, our author
was particularly serviceable to him, both by his advice and
recommendation. He, in a great measure, took upon himself
the management of the affair ; on which account he afterwards
received the thanks of the president and fellows of the college
of Thorn, in an elegant Latin letter. Near the time of his de
cease, he was engaged in assisting and recommending the
Rev. Mr. Finman, minister of the reformed congregation at
Rutzow, in the dutchy of Mecklenburgh Schwerin, who had
come over to England for a like purpose. Upon this occa
sion, a letter was written to Dr. Lardner, by Dr. Seeker,
archbishop of Canterbury, which was the conclusion of a very
long correspondence between two eminent persons, who were
now each of them on the verge of dissolution. u As this letter
displays the archbishop's state of mind at that time, and the
continuance of his regard for our author, it will be inserted
below. v

In his private deportment, Dr. Lardner was very amiable.
His manners were polite, gentle, and obliging ; and he was
attentive, in every respect, to the laws of decorum. It has
been justly remarked, that he ' seemed carefully to observe
the rules laid down in his Counsels of Prudence.' w Perhaps
it may not be disagreeable to my readers, to be informed of
the mode in which he carried on conversation. Paper, pens,
and ink, being immediately brought in when visitors came to
his house, they wrote down such intelligence as they had to
communicate, or the observations and questions which they

u Memoirs, ubi supra, p. 127, 128.

r ' Good Dr. Lardner,

« I would have seen Mr. Finman, and answered your first letter, if I had been
« able. But it hath pleased God to afflict me, for many months past, with so con-
' stant, and so severe a pain in one of my hips, that I am almost incapable of

• any attention to any thing else. Become quite useless, and nearly worn out,
I beg you will pray God to give me patience, and such degree of ease as

« he shall think fit : and can only add, that as I hope my spirit is truly chris-

* tian towards all who love the Lord Jesus in sincerity, so I am, with particular
' esteem and thankfulness for the whole of your obliging behaviour to me
« through life,

' Your faithful friend and servant,
' Lambeth, July 13th, 1768. « THOMAS CANT. ' *

* Memoirs, ubi supra, p. 128, 129.
w Memoirs, p. 130.

DR. LARDNER. H

wished to propose. To these, as they were severally written,
he replied with great cheerfulness, and in a way that was both
instructive and entertaining. As the paper contained the un
connected answers and remarks of the different guests, upon
different subjects, it formed what would have appeared to a
stranger to be a very heterogeneous mixture. It was, how
ever, carefully preserved by the Doctor, to be perused by him
when his visitors were gone ; and the perusal of it often led
him to objects of farther consideration and inquiry.

Our author was not one of those scholars who are unac
quainted with mankind. He had seen much of life during
his residence with Lady Treby ; he was continually visited by
persons of various professions and countries ; and he possess
ed that sagacity of observation, which is the principal requisite
towards obtaining a knowledge of the world. Nor is it un
common for eminent men, who live in retirement, to have some
people near them, who are fond of conveying to them every
kind of information which it is in their power to collect.
Whether such information may not occasionally derive a
tincture from the mistakes and prejudices of the communica
tors, I stay not to examine.

On the learning of Dr. Lardner it is not necessary to
enlarge, since his character in this respect is known to all the
world. With regard to that species of literature which was
cultivated by him, he was accurate and profound in the great
est degree. Some branches of knowledge there were to
which he did not apply his attention ; for who is adequate to
every object ? But as a divine, and especially with relation
to his acquaintance with the New Testament, and with Chris
tian antiquity, perhaps he never had his equal. The works of
our author being thus valuable, and relating to objects of the
highest importance, it is not surprising that they should be
held in great esteem, not only at home, but abroad. I have
already mentioned, that the first part of the Credibility was
translated into Low Dutch by the Rev. Mr. Cornelius Wes-
terbaen of Utrecht, and into Latin by the Rev. Mr. John
Christopher Wolff of Hamburgh. A German translation of
it appeared at Berlin and at Leipsic, in 1750, by the Rev.
Mr. David Bruhn of Memel in Prussia, and Mr. John David
Heilman ; and it was accompanied with a large preface, by
the Rev. Professor Seigmund Jacob Baumgarten. The
second part of the Credibility was likewise translated both in
Holland and in Germany. In 1751, the German translation
of the fourth volume was printed, and the whole design may
probably have since been completed. The Vindication of

Hi THE LIFE OF

the three Miracles was also translated into German, by the
Rev. Mr. Meyenberg, and published at Zell, in 1750, together
with a preface, written by the Rev. Dr. Plesken. A trans
lation of the Discourses on the Circumstances of the Jewish
People, appeared at Halle, in 1754 ; and of the Treatise of
the Demoniacs, at Bremen, in 1760. x

The literary connections of Dr. Lardner wrere extensive ;
and he was particularly on a very friendly footing with his
learned contemporaries among the dissenters. This has
already been sufficiently apparent in the notice which, in the
course of the present narrative, there has been occasion to
take of Lord Barrington, Dr. Hunt, Mr. Tomkins, Mr. Hal-
let, Dr. \Yard, Dr. Benson, Dr. Chandler, and Dr. Doddridge.
Our author had a high regard and esteem for Mr. Mole, and
they freely communicated to each other their opinions and
remarks on subjects of religion and literature. He corres
ponded with Mr. Breckell of Liverpool, the writer of some
valuable tracts on points of biblical criticism. In the latter
part of his life, Dr. Lardner's greatest personal intimacy was
with Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Caleb Fleming. This gentleman
lived within a few doors of him, and there was a perfect con
formity betwixt them with respect to their theological senti
ments. Residing so near to each other, for between twenty
and thirty years, their intimacy grew up to the most unreserved
confidence. My friend Dr. Towers has favoured me with the
perusal of a series of letters, written to Dr. Fleming by Dr.
Lardner, in which he freely disclosed his thoughts concerning
men and things. Dr. Fleming was a man of great integrity,
and of an acute and vigorous understanding, but in regard to
learning, not by any means to be named with his friend. He
was for a time minister to a small congregation at Bartholo
mew Close, after which he succeeded the celebrated Dr.
James Forster at Pinner's Hall. Few people have written
a greater number of pamphlets, some of which being published
without his name, were but little noticed by the world.
Others of his tracts were better received, and several of them
are curious and valuable. There are instances in which he
was singular, not to say whimsical, in his positions. His
writings might have been more generally acceptable and use
ful, if they had been free from a certain quaintness and obscu
rity of style. Aiming at originality and strength of expression,
he often lost perspicuity, and never attained to elegance. He
was a determined enemy to civil and ecclesiastical tyranny,
and a very zealous Socinian.

x Memoirs, ubi supra, p. 125, 126.

DR. LARDNER. liil

Dr. Lardner's connections and friendships were not
confined to persons of his own religious communion. He
was conversant with several respectable clergymen of the
church of England, and received from them testimonies of
their esteem for his character, and approbation of his works.
The letters which passed between him and bishop Waddirig-
ton, and his long and uninterrupted acquaintance with arch
bishop Seeker, have already been mentioned. He maintained
a large correspondence both at home and abroad : and parti
cularly in America and Germany. In consequence of the
reputation he had acquired by his publications, he was visited
by most of the learned foreigners who came over to England ;
and, after their return to their own countries, many grateful
acknowledgments were transmitted to him of the friendly
reception he had given them, and the assistance they had
derived from him in their literary designs and pursuits, y

Such being the excellences wliich Dr. Lardner possessed,
both as a writer and a man, it was natural that he should often
be spoken of in terms of respect and applause. Lord Bar-
rington concluded his correspondence with him, concerning
Jairus's daughter, in the following language : ' Thus I think
our controversy ends. But our friendship and correspond
ence I hope never will, but with our lives : and our
friendship, I hope, then but for a season. I have had so
much satisfaction and instruction from your great learning
and judgment, and from your patience, candour, openness,
and obliging manners, that, whenever I have difficulties to
put, in the future course of my inquiries, or want to see what
difficulties my sentiments are liable to, I shall take the liberty
to trouble you, unless you forbid me ; or (if your great civility
will not allow you to do that) I forbear, from the sense I have
of how much I rob the world, in the result of the learned
pursuits they justly expect from you, by such kind of inter
ruptions as those I have given you.' z

This was a tribute paid to Dr. Lardner's merit in early life :
since which he has been justly applauded by a variety of
respectable writers. Dr. Benson speaks of our author as
' his highly esteemed friend ; ' and refers his readers to the
Credibility, as a fair, full, and impartial account of the testi
monies of the ancient fathers. a

' With respect to the external evidence of Christianity/
says Dr. Jebb, ' it may be observed, that the works of the
' very learned and ingenious Dr. Lardner, are calculated to

J Ibid. z Memoirs, ubi supra, p. 41, 42.

a Benson's Paraphrases, vol. i. p. 326, and vol. ii. p. 376, second edition.

liv THE LIFE OF

' produce a firm persuasion of the truth of those historical
* facts which form the foundation of the Christian institution.' b

The bishop of Carlisle (Dr. Law) has prefaced a quotation
from our author in the following terms : ' I shall only beg
' leave to introduce the testimony of a candid and judicious
' writer, who appears to entertain right notions both of the
' nature of the Christian institution, and of the best means for
' the propagation and support of it ; and who has supplied us
' with the most valuable collection of ancient evidences of its
' truth.' c

In an anonymous tract, known to be written by Mr. Liijd-
sey, that gentleman observes, ' that the publication of the
' Letter on the Logos, in 1759, soon made a great revolution
' in the opinions of learned men. d For the piece was soon
' known to be his, though without his name ; and his numerous
' writings were already in the highest request ; his character
' also for probity, impartiality, for critical skill, and the know-
' ledge of the scriptures and of ecclesiastical history, inferior
' to none ; and in some of these respects, superior to any of
' the age.'

The same gentleman, in the same publication, has drawn
Dr. Lardner's portrait somewhat at large ; and it is with par
ticular pleasure that I present it to my readers. ' To praise
' the living would be invidious and awkward : but of those who
' have finished their course well, we may speak freely and be
' heard. Is there a literary character that stands higher upon
' the lists of fame, as a man, a Christian, and a divine, than the
' late Dr. Lardner ? After an education in a university abroad,
' at that time not inferior in learned tutors to either of our own,
' on his return to his own country, he became early acquaint-
' ed with the worthy and learned in the church established,
' and out of it. Archbishop Seeker, bred a dissenter like
' himself, cultivated and courted his friendship through life.
' His Vindication of some of our Lord's miracles against Mr.
' Woolston's attacks, is among the first upon that occasion,
' and the most candid. But his Credibility of the Gospel, in
' seventeen volumes, octavo, and Jewish and Heathen Testi-
' monies to its Truth, in four volumes, quarto, have exhibited
' such a mass of evidence for it, and established it on so broad

b Short Account of Theological Lectures, quarto, 1772, p. 17, note.

c Considerations on the Theory of Religion, p. 30, note, seventh edition.

d I do not agree with the learned and worthy writer in this assertion. It
does not appear to me that the influence of the Letter on the Logos was speedy,
but slow and gradual, and in conjunction with other publications ; among
which may be mentioned Mr. Cardale's Treatise on the true Doctrine of the
New Testament concerning Jesus Christ.

DR. LARDNER. Iv

' a foundation, as nothing can shake. In this he gives con-

* tinually curious and useful instances of critical skill and

* judgment : but his love of truth and impartiality are without

* example, in fairly representing every argument and objec-
' tion, without the least discernible bias to any opinion or
' party. His piety and humility are conspicuous in all his

* writings, and particularly in his sermons, some of which are

* among the best models for pulpit-discourses in our language,
1 in explaining important passages of the gospel, and pointing
' out the easy and natural instruction to be deduced from it.'e

Bishop Watson, in his catalogue of books of divinity, hav
ing mentioned Dr. Lardner's Letter on the Logos, imme
diately subjoins some reflections, which are so admirable, that
they cannot be omitted. ' Newton and Locke,' says his
lordship, ' were esteemed Socinians, Lardner was an avowed
' one ; Clarke and Whiston were declared Arians ; Bull and
' Waterland were professed Athanasians. Who will take
' upon him to say that these men were not equal to each other
'in probity and scriptural knowledge? And if that be admit-
' ted, surely we ought to learn no other lesson, from the
' diversity of their opinions, except that of perfect moderation

* and good- will towards all those who happen to differ from

* ourselves. We ought to entertain no other wish, but that

* every man may be allowed, without loss of fame or fortune,

' et Sentirc <y*f/z> tialit, at q^"0 *>"****"* rlZnn^n T'l-.ir. ^l^^K;4""

' freedom of inquiry, it is apprehended, is the best way of m-
' vestigating the sense of scripture, the most probable mean
' of producing an uniformity of opinion, and of rendering the

* gospel dispensation as intelligible to us in the eighteenth
« century, as, we presume, it was to Christians in the first.'

The ingenious writer of the Memoirs of Thomas Holhs,
Esq. has mentioned a short, but beautiful encomium, which
was passed on Dr. Lardner, and one of his eminent contempo
raries, by a very learned person, who has often said, that if he
were sentenced to imprisonment for seven years, he would not
desire to take any books with him into his confinement besides
the works of Jortin and Lardner. f

As several of our author's publications were of course sub
jected to the examination of the different literary journals
which this country produces, the conductors of them were
necessarily led to give, on various occasions, their sentiments

c Examination of Mr. Robinson's Plea for the Divinity of our Lord Jesus
Christ. Preface, p. xviii. xxvi. xxvii.

f Memoirs of TJHaUis, Esq. vol. i. p. 254.— I am indebted to my excellent
friend, Dr. Disney, for collecting and presenting me with the preceding te
monies.

THE LIFE OF

concerning him ; which, I believe, has uniformly been done in
terms of approbation and respect. In one place, the Monthly
Review thus speaks ; * Before we present our readers with a
' view of what is contained in this volume, (the first volume
' of the ancient Jewish and Heathen Testimonies,) we cannot,
' as friends to the religion of our country, forbear expressing
' the grateful sense we have of the eminent service our learned
' and worthy author has done to the cause of Christianity, by
' his excellent writings in defence of it. Of the many able
4 writers that have appeared in the present age, as advocates
' for the truth of the Christian religion, there are none, in our
' opinion, that deserve to be preferred to Dr. Lardner ; few,
' indeed, that can be compared with him. In point of learn-
' ing, his merit is very considerable : but what is much more
' valuable than mere learning, there is a pleasing simplicity in
' his manner of writing, and a very uncommon degree of can-
' dour and impartiality. He seems to have nothing in view
' but the discovery of truth ; scorns the mean and contempti-
' ble arts of misrepresentation, or concealing objections and
' difficulties, and gives his readers a clear and full view of the
' subject. How amiable is such a character ! how worthy of
' imitation !' &

In another place, the Monthly Reviewers have expressed
themselves in the following language : ' From the great ser-

" , * .:_x:««;4.jr ky *Ti0 loKru-irme pursuits and

learned compilations of Dr. Lardner, his name will ever be

distmguishedly honoured in the history of the Christian church.

Dr Priestley, when he speaks of this most learned and excel

lent man, generally calls him, • the prince of modern divines • '

' and we think this tribute to his illustrious merit not impro-

perly paid. 1 o the most elaborate and extensive investiira-

tions of ecclesiastical antiquity he added all that knowledge

Greek and Roman literature, which enabled him so

thoroughly to discriminate the comparative worth and excel-

lence of the sacred and profane writers. To the learning of

the scholar he added also the veracity of the historian ;

while the amiable candour and humility of the Christian

Language to a like purpose occurs in different parts of the

itical Review ; but I shall content myself with referring to

one place, in which Dr. Lardner is described as master of a

£d f? 7 < re? lnV as Possessin£ a clear head to collect
state facts and evidences, and a sound judgment to deter-

Monthly Review, vol. xxxii. p. 1, h Monthly Review> yoL ^.^ 33

DR. LARDNER. Ivii

mine concerning the weight of them ; and as having spared no
time or pains in his laborious task.1

In consequence of the recent original of the English Re
view, it hath had but one opportunity of characterizing our
author ; but that opportunity it hath embraced with distin
guished zeal and energy. * The name of Lardner,' says the
Reviewer, * is well known in the literary world. No writer,
' from the very existence of Christianity, ever conferred so
' essential a service upon true religion, or contributed more

* to clear up its evidence and elucidate its antiquities. Ac-
' cordingly, there is no country, where the Christian religion is
' professed, in which his name is not held in the greatest esteem.
' Every church would have been proud to boast of him as their
' member, and his voluminous productions have been trans-
1 lated into almost all the languages of Europe.

* Dr. Lardner certainly possessed a very clear and sound
' understanding, and great shrewdness of judgment. His in-

* dustry in the pursuit, and perseverance in the investigation,
' of truth, are without example. But the quality by which he

* was chiefly distinguished, and which was perhaps of more
' service to him than all the rest, was the candour and inge-
' nuity of his mind. He examined every thing without preju-
' dice. Seated, as it were, in a more elevated sphere than
' other men, he was not subject to have his understanding
1 darkened by tho r»l™-irlo. on^I Joi-mrli^^rl k,r *u« ^y^ri^.,,,
' mediums, of partiality, bigotry, and enthusiasm. He has,
« therefore, been as successful in refuting the false and sub-
' orned evidences of Christianity, as in asserting and illustrat-
' ing the true. Thus he has contributed, more than all the
' mistaken zeal and the pious frauds of a thousand saints and
' pontiffs could have done, to the rendering it that simple,
' venerable, attractive, and engaging structure which God and

* Jesus intended it. It is no longer obscured by impostures,
< and disfigured by the false props and buttresses that were

* brought to support it.' k

A manuscript eulogium on Dr. Lardner has been put into
my hands by a friend, Ebenezer Radcliff, Esq. the principal
part of which is inserted at the end of this narrative.

I have only recited the testimonies given to our author by
writers of our own country; but foreigners have not been
deficient in spreading forth his praise. Those who have
translated his works have introduced them with proper enco
miums on their merit ; and different learned men have taken

1 Critical Review, vol. iv. p. 517.
k English Review for December, 1785, p. 423.

Iviii THE LIFE OF DR. LARDNER.

occasion to express their sense of the excellence and value
of his productions. Walchius, in his Bibliotheca Theologica
Selecta, calls the ' Credibility ' insigne opus ; and it is highly
spoken of in the Bibliotheca Germanica, and the Bibliotheque,
ancient and modern, of Le Clerc. *

Every well-disposed reader must contemplate with pleasure,
on a life which was so admirably and usefully spent as was
that of Dr. Lardner. Such a life presents us with a beautiful
proof of the dignity to which the human mind is capable of as
cending, when it is formed on right views of the Supreme
Being, and on the true principles and spirit of the gospel.
Nor may a character like this be reflected upon with pleasure
only, but with the greatest advantage. The private virtues
of Dr. Lardner may justly be recommended to universal
imitation. His love to God and benevolence to man, his
regard to truth, his integrity, his purity, his moderation, his
candour, his meekness, and his humility, it would be the ho
nour and happiness of Christians in general to select as the
models of their temper and conduct.

Dr. Lardner may be held out, in particular, as a fine exam
ple to those of his own profession. It is not, indeed, in the
power of every one to attain to the same extent of learning,
or to perform the same services to Christianity ; but it should
be the ambition of such as are engaged in the work of the

"" J •> - -^ — L:,^ ,^J4l, /liligyon^o and zeal, t.llOllffh

they may not be able to do it with equal steps. As the dfs-
enters had the honour of producing Dr. Lardner, he will
naturally be the object of emulation to the dissenting clergy
Ihey will so far look up to him as their pattern, as to endea
vour to qualify themselves for appearing, when occasions call
tor it, in the great departments of literature, and especially in
« cause ot religious truth and liberty, and in the defence and
explication of the sacred writings. Some among them, at
least, will, it is hoped, always be inspired with this disposi-
in consequence of which they will not only gain reputa
tion to themselves, and reflect credit on the body to which they
e long ; but, what is of infinitely greater importance, will unite
with the wise, the learned, and the good of every denomina-
n, and of every country, in promoting such a knowledge of
hgion ,„ general, and of the Christian religion in particular,
be found eminently conducive to the truest improve-

From the obliging information of the Rev. Dr. Gosset.

EXTRACT

FROM A

MANUSCRIPT EULOGIUM

05T

NATHANIEL LARDNER, D. D.

EBENEZER RADCLIFF, ESQ.

THE Christian religion being founded on facts, to establish
them, and the credit of their relaters, is of the utmost conse
quence. Our author, therefore, thought the highest respect
he could pay to it was, to bring it to the test of history ; and
the result of his inquiries was, that, so far from depending
upon the forged miracles, pious frauds, and spurious testimo
nies of the ancient fathers, or the metaphysical casuistry of
modern defenders, he found it to be the weaker for their
alliance ; and like a skilful engineer, he demolished the
buttresses, which an officious or timorous zeal erected, that
the gospel, having nothing to defend but its own fortress,
might be the more firm and impregnable.

So delicate were his sentiments respecting religion, and so
jealous was he of its honour and purity, that, so far from
conniving at any flaws in its character, he could not bear it
should be suspected; and, I am persuaded, he would not,
even for the immortality it proposes, have consented to admit
one unfair or unsound argument in its defence.

While his extensive learning qualified him to try the merits
of every evidence, his unbiassed integrity, and sacred venera
tion for truth, enabled him to pass an impartial sentence.

Ix EULOG1UM ON

As his testimony was honest, so it was disinterested. He
had none of that literary pride and ambition which are a dis
grace to the pursuit of truth, and lessen the credit of its
champions. His profession debarred him from worldly emo
luments and honours, and he aspired to no recompense, but
that which flows from the nature of true religion, and the
approbation of its Divine author. So that, if I were disposed
to rest my faith on any human authority, it should be his.

I should regard the sanction of his decision as the next in
credibility to inspiration itself, and almost entitled to implicit
veneration. But this was what he never wanted ; and he has
so clearly and candidly represented the grounds of his own
belief, that every person has an opportunity of judging for
himself: and if there are any who, after such a discussion, can
remain enemies or neuters, we must leave them to God and
their own consciences, without entering into their hearts, or
determining the motives by which they have been governed.

It must be acknowledged that revelation has met with many
able and learned advocates, who have set the various evidence
of it in the most striking points of view. Its internal excel
lence, and consistency with the divine perfections, have been
clearly illustrated. The expediency of divine interposition
has been fairly deduced from the errors and imperfections of
philosophy. The propriety of the time of Christ's appearance
has been proved from a concurrence of a multitude of circum
stances ; and the agreement betwixt reason and scripture has
been fully ascertained : and many other arguments strongly
presumptuous, though not decisive, in its favour, have furnish
ed occasion for the display of much ingenious but unnecessary
reasoning.

Let but the faithfulness of the sacred records be established,
and the truth of those extraordinary facts which attested the
divine mission of Christ be confirmed, and we may challenge
the world to dispute the conclusions which are deducible from
them.

The gospel he taught must be the oracle of truth, the rule
of our faith and conduct, and the ground of our immortal
hopes and expectations.

This important task was reserved for this learned author,
and providence seems to have blessed him not only with
talents and fidelity, but with an extent of life equal to the
execution of it.

To vindicate the evangelical historians from ignorance, in
capacity, and collusion ; to fix the credit of the sacred records
by the concurrent testimony of Jews and gentiles, scoffers,

DR. LARDNER. Ixi

and apostates ; to trace the progress of the church through
several successive ages ; and to show the regular and faith
ful transmission of the scriptures without innovation or cor
ruption, were the great objects of his studies for many years :
and such is the perspicuity with which he describes and illus
trates the transactions of Christ's ministry, that he appears
more like a contemporary with the apostles than an inhabitant
of later ages.

If to this we add, that cloud of witnesses which he collected
from all quarters, to give their sanction to the miracles,
doctrine, moral sublimity, and wonderful effects of the
Christian religion, it must be allowed, that he has erected a
monument to his great Master and himself, which shall last as
long as the world endures.

As his writings justified and explained the leading facts of
the New Testament, his character was a living pattern of its
rules and precepts. His heart was full of the generous warmth
of its benevolent spirit ; but his sentiments were cool and
dispassionate, the result of calm inquiry and steady conviction.

When he thought it his duty, and for the honour of revela
tion, to call in question common opinions, he did it with unaf
fected candour and modesty, and, at the same time, with that
integrity and simplicity, which, if it did not bring over his
adversary, never offended him. He was respectful without
ceremony, friendly without officiousness, and obliging without
mean compliances. He preserved a digrlity of character
without reserve, and united the acuteness of the critic with the
manners of a gentleman and the spirit of a Christian.

The goodness of his temper excited a prejudice in favour
of his principles ; and as his writings were free from acrimony,
his life was clear of reproach.

On the whole, when I consider his ardour for truth, yet
tenderness for error, his learning mixed with so much diffi
dence and humility, his zeal tempered with so much prudence,
and his faith accompanied with so much benevolence ; when I
observe the simplicity of his deportment, his uniform and un
affected piety, his attachment to his Divine master, and good
will to mankind, I cannot help saying, " This was the disciple
whom Jesus loved. "

APPENDIX.

No. I.

LETTERS BETWEEN DR. WADDINGTON, BISHOP OF
CHICHESTER, AND MR. LARDNER.

Eton, near Windsor, Nov. 14, 1729.
Reverend Sir,

I HAVE received at this place your most agreeable present of a
Vindication, &c. against Mr. Woolston, and do beg leave to
return you my most sincere and hearty thanks for it : you have
certainly took a very proper and Christian way with him, and I
wish it may have the designed effect upon him : I have no
manner of objection to make against any one line in the book ;
you have pursued both him and his Jew very closely; and if
they are capable of conviction, you seem to be the man whom
God has raised up for that great service : I cannot say less of
your excellent performance ; and what I have said comes, I
assure you, from the sincerity of my heart.

Will you then, dear Sir, give me leave, as sincerely, to take
notice of a passage or two in your preface which as yet I cannot
so well digest, if I take you right in them, and I am sure I have
no intention to mistake you wilfully.

Page 4, you have these words, * If by way of such a reply he
' means a reply without abusive, railing terms, or invoking the
' aid of the civil magistrate ;' and a line or two after you oppose
' solid reasons and arguments' to * pains and penalties :' Now
these are passages that I own I cannot perfectly approve of :
you seem in the first to put abusive, railing terms, upon the
same foot with invoking the aid of the civil magistrate ; and in
the latter, to intimate as if pains and penalties had been de
manded by somebody or other to be inflicted upon Mr. Wool
ston, to supply the place of solid reasons and arguments. If I
am right in putting this interpretation upon your words, I muse
beg leave to say, that, in my poor opinion, there is no occasion
for them ; I don't know any one person of character, who, in
writing against Mr. Woolston, has invoked the aids of the civil

Ixiv APPENDIX TO THE

magistrate to inflict pains and penalties upon Mr. Woolston, for
being an infidel, or writing against the Christian religion ; but
only for writing against it in such a blasphemous, abusive, scan
dalous manner, as I think may very justly raise the indignation
and resentment of every honest man, whether Christian or not.
The two bishops of London and St. David have expressly de^
clared this in print : and I believe it is the sentiment of many
more of that order in the church, if not of all, that (as you very
well express it in the llth page of your preface) * it is the plea-
' sure of Christ that men should not be compelled to receive
' his law by the punishments of this life, or the fear of them ;
' but that they should be left to propose their doubts and ob-
' jections— provided it be done in a grave, serious manner.'
But give me leave, dear Sir, to ask you, with some concern,
whether Mr. Woolston has proposed his doubts and difficulties
in a grave, serious manner ? and if you say he has not done it,
as I believe you will, do not you seem to intimate yourself, by
putting in that reserve, as if you thought the civil magistrate
might punish him for not observing it ; or at least, that there is
nothing, in punishing him for the breach of all the laws of chris-
tian charity and common decency, contrary to the will and
pleasure of Jesus Christ ? This then is the difficulty that sticks
with me in respect to these passages in your preface : and as I
have very freely, and yet, I hope, in a very friendly manner,
mentioned them to you, so I doubt not but you will, in the
same free and kind way, endeavour to remove them ; which will
make me perfectly easy ; for I am sorry to meet with any thing
in your writings, (so truly serviceable to the Christian religion,)
that may give the least occasion of offence to the sincere lovers
of Jesus Christ and his gospel. I am, with the utmost respect,
esteem, and gratitude,

Reverend Sir,

Your affectionate

faithful friend,

EDWARD CHICHESTER.

To this Mr. Lardner answered as follows :

My Lord,

I HAVE received the favour of your very kind and friendly
letter, for which I am greatly indebted to your Lordship. As
your approbation of what I have written in the defence of Chris
tianity affords me the highest satisfaction, so it is no small con-
cern to me that there has been any thing said in the preface

LIFE OF DR. LARDNER. Ixv

whicli is offensive to a person of your Lordship's known judg
ment and integrity ; who have also expressed so much kindness
to me, beyond my desert or expectation.

I believe, (and think I may be positive,) that when I wrote
those expressions, (preface, page 4.) I had no regard to a de
mand made by any one, of a punishment on Mr. Woolston for
his writings. I only intended to disown, in plain terms, which
might not be mistaken, the principles of persecution, which he
had charged upon so many of his adversaries. As when I men
tioned a reply without abusive terms, I had no reference to any
reply written in that way ; (for I have seen no such, nor has he
complained of any thing of that nature, that I know of, besides
his being called an infidel, whereas, he says he is a Christian ;)
so, when I wished his conviction without pains and penalties, I
had no reference to any demand made of them. But I do own>
that, in the first paragraph of page 11, I had a reference to a
demand, which I thought had been made for punishing him for
his writings. And, I suppose, if he should be punished it will
be for writing against Christianity, and not for his manner of
doing it.

I am far from thinking that Mr. Woolston has written in a
grave and serious manner : and I have strongly expressed my
dislike of his manner in the latter end of page 11, and page 12.

Your Lordship freely declares, he ought not to be punished
for being an infidel, nor for writing at all against, the Christian
religion ; which appears to me a noble declaration. If the
governors of the church and civil magistrates had all along acted
up to this principle, I think, the Christian religion had been
before now well-nigh universal. But I have supposed it to be
a consequence from this sentiment, that if men have an allow
ance to write against the Christian religion, there must be also
considerable indulgence as to the manner likewise. This has
appeared to me a part of that meekness and forbearance, which
the Christian religion obliges us to ; who are to reprove, rebuke,
and exhort with all long-suffering. The proper punishment
of a low, mean, indecent, scurrilous way of writing seems to be
neglect, contempt, scorn, and general indignation. Your Lord
ship has observed (in my opinion) extremely well, that this way
of writing is such as may justly raise the indignation and re
sentment of every honest man, whether Christian or not. This
punishment he has already had in part, and will probably have
more and more, if he should go on in his rude and brutal way
of writing. And if we leave all further punishment to Him, to
whom vengeance belongs, I have thought it might be much for
the honour of ourselves, and of our religion. But if he should
be punished farther, the stream of resentment and indignation
will turn ; especially if the punishment should be severe ; and it
is likely, that a small punishment will not suffice to engage to
silence, nor to an alteration of the manner of writing.

f

Ixvi APPENDIX TO THE

I truly think, that the christians of this nation are" at present
under a great trial ; and I heartily wish we may behave so under
it, as may be most for the lasting honour of our religion. It
seems to me much better for us, as christians, to err somewhat
(if it be an error) on the side of tenderness and meekness, rather
than on the side of severity ; nothing having done the Christian
cause greater prejudice, than the severities practised by some who
have borne the name of Christian. It has seemed to me (as I have
said) to be a consequence of permitting men to write against
Christianity, that we must also show indulgence toward the
manner, in some measure. But no one is to be allowed to say
any thing injurious to men's characters ; this is properly a
breach of the peace. I am persuaded, that no man has been
more sensibly grieved and offended than myself, at the abusive
treatment that has been given to men of the highest order, and
greatest merit in the church. And if any thing of this kind has
been said, cognizable by the laws, no man can complain of a just
punishment.

I have, my Lord, freely represented my sentiments, which
are submitted to your Lordship's consideration with the greatest
humility and deference. I hope I have nothing more at heart,
than the general interest of the Christian religion. And if I
have declared in favour of too great lenity, it has been purely
because I have supposed it would be in the end most for the
advantage of that good cause.

I have the honour to be,
My Lord,

Your Lordship's

Most obliged, most humbic,
and obedient Servant,

N. LARDNER.
Nov. 22, 1729.

To which his Lordship answered:

Eton College, Nov. 25, 1729.
Reverend Sir,

I HAVE received yours of the 22d, and am very well satisfied
with the explication you have been pleased to give me of your
meaning in those passages in the 4th page of your preface, which,
upon the first reading, seemed to me to have a more particular
view than you now declare they had ; and I can very readily
believe what you now assert to be true, and should indeed beg
your pardon for my mistake, (though it was by no means a wil
ful one,) if the candour that appears in every part of your
letter did not tempt me to think you have granted it without my
asking.

LIFE OF DR. LARDNfcR. Ixvii

I don't see that you and I are likely to differ much as to any
other points touched upon in your letter ; our general principles,
with respect to the true method of propagating and defending
our holy religion, are, I believe, the same; and I wish as heartily
as you can do, that no other had ever been followed by eccle
siastical or civil governors ; but still I am at a loss how to under
stand what you are pleased to say, * That there must be likewise
' considerable indulgence allowed as to the manner of writing
' against the Christian religion.' I am not sure whether, if Mr,
Woolston heard this, he would not say, it is all the indulgence
he desires ; for he has declared, ' that he cannot write otherwise
' than he has done already ;' and if for that reason, because he
cannot write otherwise, he must be indulged in writing in his own
way, there is no doubt but that he will go on in writing after such
a manner, as you seem to think may justly raise the indignation
and resentment of every honest man, whether Christian or not ;
and for which I cannot, I own, think that bare contempt is a suf
ficient punishment ; considering the great mischief such a way
of writing must do, and daily does in the world : I am willing to
indulge such writers as far as ever Christian meekness and charity
require me to go ; but I would just beg leave to ask, what opinion
you think St. Paul, or any other truly primitive Christian, would
have had, of any person writing in those days (and that while he
still professed himself a Christian) in such a manner as Mr. Wool
ston does in these? what do you imagine their conduct would have
been ? whether they would have carried the Christian principles
of meekness and tenderness so far as to have indulged him in such
a manner of writing, in hopes of working his conviction in that
way ? It does not appear, by those instances we have in the
epistles of the exercise of Christian discipline in those days, that
they were then indolent in matters of such consequence to the
Christian religion ; nor do 1 think we are under any obligation to
do so now, and therefore I should be unwilling to give any indul
gence at all to ' such a manner' of writing, much less a ' consider-
' able one,' as your words (considering the occasion on which they
are used, and to which they must refer) seem to imply that we
should. You, indeed, add afterwards, 'That no man is to be
' allowed to say any thing injurious to men's characters, and that
' if any thing of this kind has been said, no man can complain
' of a just punishment, for this is properly a breach of the peace*'
Now no one who has read Mr. Woolston's books or prefaces can
surely have the least doubt upon his mind, but that he is in this
respect guilty to the highest degree; and therefore, in your opinion,
deserves a just punishment ; but besides this, I think a sincere
Christian may and ought to go farther ; he may very justly be
concerned for the honour of his blessed Saviour, and have some
real stirrings in his breast for preventing such abuses of that holy
name as have no sort of argument in them to persuade and con
vince ; cannot be the result of any fair reasoning against the chris-

12

Ixvili APPENDIX TO THE

tian religion, but must necessarily proceed from a spirit fit to" be
abhorred by all mankind, and can never be a humane way of
' propagating truth,' whether for or against Christianity. These,
dear Sir, are my free and impartial thoughts upon that particular
passage in your letter, which mentions the ' considerable indulgence7
that ought to be made as to the ' manner' of writing against Chris
tianity. And I hope, upon the whole, that you and I don't differ
so much even on this point, as we may seem to do. What punish
ments are proper for such a manner of writing, or whether it
may be looked upon as a breach of the peace in a ' Christian
society,' and so by your own allowance punishable by the civil
magistrate, are points I shall not enter into now, any farther than
to declare freely my opinion, that such a writer ought to be
punished by the ecclesiastical censure of the church, and declared
excommunicate by a proper authority ; and if he could be farther
restrained from writing on in the same * outrageous manner' by
the civil magistrate, (with a liberty still to use reason instead of
railing,) I don't see how this could be any prejudice to the Chris
tian religion, any contradiction to the true forbearing spirit of it,
any injury to the just liberties of mankind, or any injustice to the
writer himself, but in my poor opinion the greatest kindness that
could possibly be done him. I heartily thank you, good Sir, for
the present you have made me of your additions to your former
excellent book, which, I am sure, I shall read with a great deal
of profit, as well as pleasure, as soon as they come to hand.
You will be so good as to excuse me in not transcribing this long
letter, which indeed (considering the many corrections in it) I
should do, but such compliments between friends will, I hope,
not be expected, nor am I sure if I should attempt it, not to
commit again as many faults as I mend. I am, therefore, with
out any more ceremony, and with the greatest sincerity and
respect,

Reverend Sir,

Your very faithful Friend,
and humble Servant,

EDWARD CHICHESTER.

Mr. Lardner answered:

December 2, 1729.
My Lord,

I HAVE the favour of your letter of the 25th of November, which,
I hope, your Lordship will permit me to say, is a pattern of con
descension and goodness ; nor can I help esteeming it an honour
to me, that my sentiments are so agreeable to that truly Christian
spirit expressed in your letter.

The reasons of my saying that it was a consequence of per
mitting men to write against the Christian religion, ' that there

LIFE OF DR. LARDNER. Ixx

* must be likewise considerable indulgence as to the manner of
writing,' were chiefly these : that the permission of writing
against the Christian religion contained in it so much, that the

* manner of it also should be borne with, in a considerable degree :
and secondly, the cause of those who oppose Christianity is so bad
and desperate, that they who argue against it are naturally, and
almost necessarily, led into an unfair way of arguing. If men
are so weak, or so wicked, as to write against Christianity, I
expect to see them make use of some bad arts to support their
cause. The fact has been agreeable to this supposition. The
writers in the defence of Christianity have actually exceeded
their adversaries, not only in their arguments and reasons, but
also in the manner of arguing and reasoning.

If what Mr. Woolston says, that he ' cannot write otherwise,'
be true, it farther confirms this supposition, and is a shameful
truth for him and his cause, publicly acknowledged by himself.

To your Lordship's question, What I think would have been
the conduct of St. Paul, and other primitive Christians, in a like
case ? I readily answer, my Lord, that, I believe, they would
have pronounced a sentence of excommunication, and it would,
in my opinion, be justly pronounced upon Mr. Woolston. The
sentiments advanced by him, and his manner of defending them,
do both together, and each of them singly, deserve that sentence.

Mr. Woolston has writ in a most abusive and injurious man
ner to men's characters, but I did not know that he had been
prosecuted for it, though I thought he well deserved it.

I have also the honour to agree with your Lordship, that we
ought to have a very great zeal and concern for the honour of
our blessed Saviour, and an abhorrence of all ways, ' not hu
mane, of propagating truth, whether for or against' Christianity;
or that have a plain tendency to destroy a sense of religion and
virtue in men's minds.

I conclude with humbly acknowledging your Lordship's good
ness in communicating to me your sentiments upon these matters
in so kind and friendly a manner.

I am, my Lord,
Your Lordship's

most obliged, most humble,
and obedient Servant,

N. LARDNER.

APPENDIX, No. II.

LETTER OF MR. LARDNER TO LORD BARRINGTON.

March 7, 1729-30.
My Lord,

I AM very sensible of the honour done me by your Lordship's
approbation of the " Vindication of three Miracles, &c." and
have a great deal of reason to rejoice, that the manner in which
the argument for free writing is managed in the preface is not
unacceptable to your Lordship ; for, as to the principles them
selves, I had no doubt but they would be agreeable to your judg
ment, however they may be suspected or disliked by others, who
have less studied the Christian doctrine ; a true Christian may
suffer on account of his religion, but he can never make others
suffer on account of theirs. Whatever may be the consequence
of it, we are not to support Christianity by force. Our blessed
Saviour, rather than make use of compulsion, would choose to be
without a follower. John vi. 67.

I will briefly go over all your Lordship's difficulties relating to
the death of Jairus's daughter, and then offer some considera
tions in favour of the common opinion.

I. * There is not the conclusive evidence that Jairus's daugh
ter was dead, &c.' The evidence is conclusive and satisfactory
here. If they might be mistaken in her case, so they might in
Lazarus, when buried : and if buried, while in a deliquium or
sleep, he might have continued in it several days.

II. Zw077<T£rai in the text is a general word. It does not
directly express healing barely, but that she should do well, let
the case be never so desperate ; and this was as much as it be
came our Saviour to say at that time.

III. Our Saviour, your Lordship knows very well, did not
speak in Greek, but in^Syriac. Probably he used one and
the same word, when he said " Lazarus sleeps," and the " maid
sleeps." That the evangelists have used KaOkvcw in one place,
and fcot/«ojuai in another, is of no manner of importance ; since
the disciples understood him to speak of natural sleep, when he
said, " Lazarus sleepeth."

IV. The saying, she was " not dead," as well as she
«' sleeps," does not appear to strengthen the assertion. It is all
one and the same thing. I think we ought to make no scruples
here, now we have the story of Lazarus, in which it is related,
First, that Christ said, this sickness is not " unto death," and
yet he did die: and then " our friend Lazarus sleeps:" meaning
at the same time, that Lazarus was dead, and he would raise

LIFE OF DR. LARDNER. Ixxi

him up. As when he said Lazarus's sickness " was not unto
death," he must be understood of a final death ; so when he
said, the maid " is not dead," he must be understood also of a
final death, since all her friends knew she was dead.

V. The matter of the fifth objection serves, in my opinion, to
show the propriety of the common interpretation. " Be gone,"
for there is no occasion for you ; the maid is not to be buried,
she is not finally dead, but will be raised up, as out of a sleep ;
therefore your lamentations are not seasonable.

VI. The last objection is taken from the circumstances. I
perceive no impropriety at all in the action of taking her by the
hand, supposing her to be dead ; nor in the ordering * meat to
be set before her.' This last indeed would have been very im
proper in the case of the two other persons raised to life, who
were abroad, but she was at home. Their life, health, and
strength, would also appear sufficiently in walking home before
the company present, with all the vigour and agility becoming
men. But as this other case was in a woman, who cannot with
decency show strength and vigour by leaping, or agility in walk
ing, and as she was at home, eating was a very proper sign to
be given of her health and strength. Moreover, as her resurrec
tion was performed before so few witnesses, it was very proper
to have some more near, close witnesses of her life and health ;
and such the servants and friends of the family would be, when
they immediately saw her eat.

The considerations whereby I would support the common
opinion are these :

I. If Jairus's daughter was not dead, Matthew and Mark have
given no instance of a resurrection to life by our Saviour ; which
would be very strange, since there were several, and they appear
to know there were. Another consequence is this : If it be sup
posed, that Jairus's daughter was not dead, 'tis impossible to
prove to an infidel, that the other two persons were dead. Her
friends supposed her dead ; Matt. ix. 24. When Jesus said,
the maid was not dead, " they laughed him to scorn :" Mark v.
40, " And they laughed him to scorn." Luke viii. 53, " They
laughed him to scorn, knowing she was dead." We must take
the cases of those Christ healed or raised as they are brought to
him, or represented to him by those who may be reasonably
supposed to know what their cases are ; or we overthrow all
evidence, and weaken the credit, not of this only, but of all the
other miracles of our Saviour.

II. Matthew and Mark thought she was dead, and that this
miracle was a resurrection to life, or else they would have related
some other miracle of this sort.

III. All the three evangelists represent her dead. Matt. ix.
18, 24 ; Mark v. 35, 40 ; Luke viii. 49, 53.

IV. The common paraphrase of, " the maid is not dead," &c.
that is, she is not finally dead, so dead as to be buried, but shall

APPENDIX TO THE

be raised, as out of a sleep, is very agreeable to our Saviour's
way of speaking upon some other occasions ; and is extremely
suitable to silence those weepers and lamenters to whom he
spoke.

I intended to have concluded here : but, upon a review, I fear
your Lordship may think I have not paid a sufficient regard to
the first circumstance of the sixth objection, viz. * that our
Saviour takes her by the hand, before he says, " Arise !" which
is not an action suited to raise one absolutely incapable to help
herself.' There is no more assistance given to a lame man than
to a dead man by taking him by the hand to enable him to
walk alone. No action or word is used in working a miracle,
because there is any virtue in the word spoken, or the action
used, of taking hold by the hand, or in any other action assign
able. All the virtue is owing to the infinite, almighty power of
God alone, who graciously performs the work, when those words
are spoken, or those actions are done by his servants, by his
orders.

Again, ' That our Saviour takes her by the hand, before he
says, Arise !' Perhaps, the taking by the hand, and the word
arise, were simultaneous, or the word arise was spoken imme
diately after Christ took her by the hand, as soon after as could
be. But I shall show presently (as I apprehend) the propriety
of the different method taken by Christ and Peter ; though it is
by no means necessary, that we should be able to assign the
precise propriety of every word or action recorded in the history
of these matters. It seems to me, not becoming Peter to make
use of any action, that looked like helping a man perfectly im
potent, (such as taking him by the hand,) before he first pro
nounced these or the like words : " In the name of Jesus Christ
of Nazareth, arise and walk :" but after that it was proper
enough for him to use an action, which is a sort of token of
kindness, and take him by the hand.

When Peter raised Dorcas, he first went to prayer, and did
not take her by the hand till after she had opened her eyes, and
sat up ; that is, was perfectly restored to health and life by the
Divine Being. It is too arrogant for an apostle, in the case
especially of a dead person, to use an action that has an appear
ance of giving help, before he has been at prayer, or made some
other address to God. But in our blessed Saviour it was highly
proper and becoming, to take by the hand, in a kind and friendly
manner, even a dead person, as if she were alive. Though no
one would reasonably say there was any impropriety in Christ's
saying, Arise ! to Jairus's daughter, before he took her by the
hand, yet there does appear to me a peculiar propriety in our
blessed Saviour's taking by the hand this dead young woman,
before, or at the very instant, that he said, Arise !

I hope there is no reason for me to add a caution, that it ought
not to be objected to me, that there was no such action used in

LIFE OF DR. LARDNER. Ixxiii

the case of Lazarus, or the young man at Nain ; because the
circumstances of these cases are perfectly different. It would
have been the highest impropriety for Christ to take Lazarus by
the hand, whether he had himself gone into Lazarus's sepulchre,
or Lazarus had been first brought up to him ; it would also have
been highly improper for our Saviour to have gone so near the
young man at Nain, as to be able to touch him. He did as
much as was proper before he raised him, in ordering the bier
to stop. But as the young woman was laid in her chamber, and
Jesus was brought thither, near to her, his taking her by the
hand is highly proper ; it is one of the beauties and proprieties
of our Lord's actions in this story, which ought not to have been
omitted, and with which I am now much delighted, and heartily
thank your Lordship for helping me to it. It demonstrates the
plenitude of divine power, and divine goodness, that were and
are in him. It is an affecting, endearing specimen of the love
and friendship of the Son of God, and in him of God himself, to
poor mortal men.

But whether I am in the right or not in those thoughts just
mentioned, with which I now please myself, (but, however, do
not think them of any great importance,) I apprehend I may
except against an interpretation of a single phrase or expression,
which is inconsistent with the rest of the narration. And I own,
that I think this way of interpreting scriptures would lead us
into innumerable mistakes. I am, my Lord,

Your Lordship's
Most humble and obedient servant,

N. LARDNER.

APPENDIX, No. III.

LETTER SENT BY MR. LARDNER TO MR. LA ROCHE.

Sir,

THE exact care with which you read the books of the New Tes
tament, appears not only in the judicious remarks and observa
tions, which I have received from you, but also in the difficulties
which you sometimes propose to me. As for the difficulty men
tioned in your last, concerning the omission of the history of our
Saviour's ascension, in the gospels of St. Matthew and St. John,
though related by St. Mark, xvi. 19, and St. Luke, xxiii. 51, I
might say, in behalf of St. John, that he had read St. Mark's

JXXIV APPENDIX TO THE

and St. Luke's gospels : and that one main view he had in writing-
was, to put down those things which the other evangelists had
not mentioned : but I do not insist upon this. This omission
may be accounted for by other considerations, which will justify
St. Matthew as well as him.

* I. The design of all the evangelists in their gospels, was to
' write such a history of Jesus, as would prove him to be the
' Christ.' That this was their design appears from the gospels
themselves. And St. John has expressly said, that it was his,
chap. xx. 31, " These things are written, that ye might believe
that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God."

' II. That Jesus is the Christ, is sufficiently shown by his
' miracles, the extraordinary appearances from heaven in his
' favour during the course of his ministry, and by his resarrec-
' tion from the dead, recorded by all the evangelists.' Our
Saviour had himself put the truth of his mission upon his resur
rection, as a decisive proof of his claim ; Matt. xvi. 4, compared
with Luke xi. 29, 30 ; John ii. 18—22. And St. Paul says,
Rom. i. 4, that Jesus was " declared to be the Son of God by
the resurrection from the dead." See also Acts xvii. 3.

' III. By our Saviour's resurrection is always intended a resur-
' rection to an endless life, without dying any more ; and his
' ascension to the Father follows thereupon ;' unless this had
been the case, his resurrection, without any mention of his
ascension, could not have been made (as it often is) the princi
pal article of the Christian doctrine. " To be a witness with us
of his resurrection," Acts i. 22. — " With great power gave the
apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus," chap,
iv. 33. — " If thou shalt confess with thy mouth, and believe in
thine heart, that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt
be saved," Rom. x. 9. See also Acts xxvi. 23 ; 2 Tim. ii. 8.

But I will detain you a little longer upon this head, to show
both these things particularly.

' I. By our Saviour's resurrection is always intended a resur-
' rection to an endless life, without dying any more.' This is
sometimes expressed ; when not expressed, it is implied.
" Whom God has raised up, (saith St. Peter,) having loosed the
pains of death, because it was not possible that he should be
holden of it," Acts ii. 24. — St. Paul at Antioch, in Pisidia :
" And as concerning that he raised him from the dead, now no
more to return to corruption,1' Acts xiii. 34. — " Knowing that
Christ, being raised from the dead, dieth no more ; death hath
no more dominion over him," Rom. vi. 9.

When not expressed, it is implied. St. Peter, in his discourses
to Cornelius, makes no express mention of Christ's ascension,
but preaches only his resurrection, as a proof that he was made
Lord of all. Acts x. 40, 42. And the same apostle saith, that
" God has begotten us again to a lively hope, by the resurrection
of Christ from the dead," &c. 1 Pet. i. 3, 4. St. Paul often

LIFE OF DR. LARDNER. Ixxv

argues in the same manner. At Athens he proves a future judg
ment by Christ, from his resurrection. Acts xvii. 31. And,
Rom. xiv. 9, " To this end Christ both died, and rose, and
revived, that he might be Lord both of the quick and dead."
And 1 Cor. xv. 12, and 20. Once more, 2 Cor. iv. 14.

I might likewise show this to be agreeable to the style of the
evangelists, in their gospels. When our Lord, in St. Matt. xii.
40, publicly foretells his resurrection, saying, " As Jonas," &c.
it is implied that he should be no longer in the state of the dead.
This is implied also in what he said to the disciples, Matt. xxvi.
32. It would be tedious to refer you to all the passages to this
purpose in our Saviour's last discourses with his disciples,
recorded by St. John : " I go to prepare a place for you," John
xiv. 2. " Because I live, ye shall live also," ver. 19.

* II. Our Lord's ascension to heaven was also supposed to
' follow upon his resurrection.' This is evident from John xx. 17,
wjien he says to Mary Magdalen, " Touch me not ! for I am
not yet ascended to my Father," or, I do not immediately ascend
to my Father. It seems, she supposed that, being risen, he
would presently ascend to heaven : he therefore assures her,
that there would be other opportunities for her to converse
with him, and to examine whether it was really he himself, or
not ;' and for him to communicate to her, or others, what was
needful they should be further informed of by him : " But go to
my brethren, and say unto them, that I ascend to my Father,
<fec. ;" which words show, that, " I am about to ascend" to
God, or, " I am risen," are in a manner equivalent terms. This
is also evident from Acts ii. 23 — 35, particularly ver. 32, 33.
God's " raising him up," was an assurance that he was also
exalted, or very soon to be exalted.

* III. There was no absolute necessity, that the disciples, or
' any other persons, should see Christ ascend, or leave this
' earth.' For his exaltation to power was fully ascertained to
the disciples by his resurrection, (of which they had distinct
proof,) and by the descent of the Holy Ghost upon them : to
others, by the testimony of the disciples, concerning his resur
rection, by the gifts of the Holy Ghost bestowed upon them,
and by the miracles they performed.

* IV. But though there was no necessity of it, yet there was
' great wisdom and goodness in our Saviour's granting the
* disciples a sight of his ascension from this earth ;' as hinted
by St. Mark and St. Luke in their gospels, and somewhat more
particularly related, Acts i. 9 — 11 ; — because it was of use to
confirm them, and to encourage them in the difficult work they
were soon to enter upon. It is also of use the more to satisfy
us, and all in after times, of the truth of his resurrection, and
exaltation, though there are other things sufficient without it.

Upon the whole, it seems to me, that the evangelists have
acted wisely, and as the case required, in insisting chiefly on

Jxxvi APPENDIX to THE

more important matters, than the sight the disciples had of
Christ's ascension from this earth. And the conclusion of St.
Matthew's gospel (to say nothing more of St. John's) after the
evidences of our Saviour's resurrection, is a very proper con
clusion of a history of Jesus, written to prove that he was the
Christ. " And Jesus came, and spake unto them, saying, All
power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore
and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost : teaching them to
observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you : and lo,
I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world."

I am your's, &c.

N. LARDNER.

APPENDIX, No. IV.

LETTER FROM DR. MORGAN TO MR. LARDNER, WITH
HIS ANSWER.

Reverend Sir,

I HAVE lately read your Credibility of the Gospel History, with
a great deal of pleasure and profit : I observe in it a spirit of
candour and impartiality, not very common in works of this
kind ; and I think you have deserved very well of the learned
world, by removing several considerable difficulties, which might
seem to affect the evangelical history. It is a great unhappiness
to your friends in general, and to me as much as any man, that,
by the nature of your disorder, we are deprived of the advan
tages we might otherwise reap from your conversation.

From what I had heard of your work, and of your known
character, I had a curiosity to see what you had offered towards
removing the difficulties concerning the historical and chrono
logical account of Christ's birth and baptism, as related by the
two evangelists Matthew and Luke, or rather of St. Luke him
self; for, as the matter now stands, the whole difficulty rests
upon him, who places the birth of our Saviour in the days of
Herod the Great, and at the time of the first taxation of the
whole country of Judea by Cyrenius, and this by a decree issued
out under the sole authority of Augustus, without the least
mention of Herod's name ; and with this farther chronological
character, that Jesus was full thirty in the fifteenth of Tiberius.
I must own that this has always appeared an insurmountable
difficulty to me, and that I am not yet able to get rid of k, after

LIFE OF DR. LARDNER. Ixxvii

a careful consideration of all that you have observed and offered
concerning it.

That any taxation, enrolment, or census should be laid upon
the whole country by the sole authority of Augustus, while
Herod was still king of Judea, and in high favour with the
emperor, seems to me incredible ; and I think no such instance
can be given, or any thing parallel to it, with respect to any
country where the Romans owned a king.

The thing here speaks itself, and no man could doubt of it if
he had not some prejudice or prepossession to the contrary.
But our chronologers, in this point, have been forced to offer
violence to Josephus, and to give up all his historical and chro
nological characters relating to the death of Herod the Great,
and the nativity of Christ, though they are infinitely fond, at
the same time, of maintaining the authority of Josephus in most
other cases.

But what I lay the main stress on here is, the authority of
Eusebius, towards the middle of the fourth century ; who main
tains that the taxation recorded "by Luke, was the very same
which was laid by Augustus upon the whole country of Judea
after the banishment of Archelaus. And this is a decisive point,
and even a demonstration with me, so far as history can be re
duced to any thing of certainty, that Luke, Josephus, and Eu
sebius were in the right ; and that there was no gospel extant
in the time of Eusebius, and owned as authentic by the ca
tholics, which placed the birth of our Saviour in the days of
Herod. For it is not to be imagined that Eusebius should con
tradict the genuine, authentic, and recognized gospels of his
own times, or that he should make the Roman census laid upon
Judea, as mentioned by Josephus and Luke, to have been the
same, if this had been repugnant to the scriptures of that age.

The first chapter of Luke, from verse 4 to the end, is plainly
a parenthesis, as it interrupts the course of the story in order of
time, and besides, contains, as I think, several plain marks of
ignorance, superstition, and forgery : for this parenthesis seems
to have been taken from the pseudo Matthew, with some farther
additions and improvements, which made the matter look still
worse.

In Luke i. ver. 28 — 33, the angel Gabriel is introduced as
appearing to the Virgin Mary, to assure her, by a revelation
from God, that she should conceive, without the knowledge of
man, in a miraculous way ; and that the child born of her,
should be that great Prince or temporal Deliverer who had been
foretold by the prophets. " He shall be great, and shall be
called the Son of the Most High : and the Lord God shall give
unto him the throne of his father David. And he shall reign
over the house of Jacob for ever ; and of his kingdom there shall
be no end." Ver. 32, 33.

This, one would think, should have been a sufficient de-

Ixxviii APPENDIX TO THE

claration from God, to put Joseph and Mary out of doubt, that
the child was to restore the kingdom to Israel, and settle an
everlasting dominion in the house of David, as God had declared
by the mouths of all the prophets ; and as the whole nation had
ever understood them, and founded their expectations upon
them. And yet, afterwards, when Zacharias the father of John,
Simeon; and Anna the prophetess, came to prophesy the same
thing, Mary was very much astonished, she " kept all these
sayings, and pondered them in her heart," but knew not what it
would come to, or what such predictions should mean, though
she had been let into the secret by a revelation from God before
her conception. Matthew mentions nothing of this revelation
from God to Mary by the angel, but places the whole credit of
the story upon Joseph's dream, that which his spouse had de
clared to him, or should have declared, was true.

There is another remarkable difference between the pseudo
Matthew, and Luke's annotator, which seems to discredit the
whole story of Christ's being born under Herod. Matthew tells
us, that soon after the nativity of our Saviour, Joseph, being
warned of God in a dream, took the young child and his mother,
and fled into Egypt till the death of Herod. But his emendator
in Luke assures us, that after the parents had been at Jerusalem,
and performed the ceremony of purification in the temple,
" They returned again to Galilee, to their own city Nazareth,"
Luke, chap. ii. 39, without the least mention of Herod, or any
apprehensions they were under from him.

The genealogy of Christ in Matthew and Luke, supposes
plainly that he had some natural descent, and that he was, as
St. Paul affirms, according to the flesh, of the seed of Abraham,
and descended from the fathers of the Jewish nation. But the
story of our pseudo Matthew cannot possibly be reconciled with
this.

Our modern chronologers, in attempting to justify this piece
of false history, have been obliged to offer violence to Josephus,
and give up all his historical and chronological characters with
respect to the reign and death of Herod. And had it not been
for such a prejudice, they could have found no difficulty at all
in Josephus as to this matter. That he was made or declared
king of Judea in the 5th Julian year, or in the year of the
Julian period 4673, and that he died in the 42d Julian year, or
the year of the Julian period 4710, would have been thought
very plain from Josephus, had there been nothing else in the
case. In the Julian year 42, March 13th, about three in the
morning, there happened a great and remarkable eclipse of the
moon, which is mentioned by Josephus as falling out a little
before the pascha, when Herod's life was despaired of ; and he
died that year before the feast. This eclipse happened on the
full moon before the pascha ; and besides this, there is no other
eclipse of the moon which can stand in competition with it,

LTFE OF DR. LARDNER.

within the time that Herod's death may be disputed ; I mean no
eclipse visible in Judea, or within the observation of that
country.

You may here observe, that this supposed revelation from God
to Mary by the angel Gabriel, was the declaration of a thing
false in fact, though such hope or expectation had been deeply
rooted and confirmed in the whole Jewish nation for near one
thousand years, or from the time of the revolt of the ten tribes.
For after this, all their prophets had promised and foretold the
restoration of the kingdom to the house of David, and the per
petual duration of it in that family after such a restoration.

But Christ himself always disclaimed this Messiahship, and
declined all the overtures made to him about it ; and he would
not be received and owned as that branch from the root of Jesse,
who was to restore the nation to their ancient liberties and in
dependency, as had been declared to them from the mouths of
all the prophets.

When our Saviour came upon his trial before Pilate, he re
nounced this Jewish character of the Messias, and declared that
he had never set up any such pretensions, that he had made no
such claim among the Jews, and that though this was what
they charged him with, and he must die for it, yet they could
bring no proof of it.

But surely, had the revelation of the angel to Mary, and the
prophecies of Zacharias, Simeon, and Anna, been now produced
and proved, the evidence must have been very strong against
him, and he had been justly put to death as an impostor and
false prophet.

I know not what you may think of me, Sir, for the freedom
of these observations ; but I can assure you, that I am not at all
interested in the matter, and therefore should not be sorry if the
quite contrary should happen to be true.

You may keep this correspondence as deep a secret as you
please, for I shall discover the subject of it to nobody without
your leave.

I thought I could not talk to any man of greater impartiality
and integrity, or who might be more likely to remove my scruples ;
and therefore I shall beg leave to subscribe myself,

Sir,
Your most sincere friend,

and humble Servant,

T. MORGAN.

May 10th, 1735.

Ixxx APPENDIX TO THE

Mr. Lardner answered:

Hoxton Square, June 17th, 1735.
Sir,

I AM honoured with your letter of the 10th of May. It is a great
satisfaction to me, that the Credibility, &c. has been so far ap
proved by a person of your learning and acuteness. I know,
that I did not willingly dissemble, or lessen any objections
against the Evangelical History ; and was in hopes I had
removed them to the satisfaction of the attentive and candid,
who will make but just allowances for the loss of ancient writ
ings.

I shall offer a few things in answer to your letter, with a
design of giving farther satisfaction, or receiving farther light
myself.

You say, 'that any taxation, enrolment, or census should
' be laid upon the whole country, by the sole authority of
' Augustus, while Herod was king of Judea, and in high favour
' with the emperor, seems incredible.' I apprehend that this
ought not to be thought incredible, considering the few remaining
accounts of the treatment of dependent princes, or provinces.
You indeed put it, ' in high favour :' but I have plainly shown,
that Herod was for some time under the displeasure of Augustus.
And it is evident from Josephus himself, that there was an oath
exacted, and an enrolment made, at the latter end of the reign
of Herod ; an affair that answers very well to that mentioned by
St. Luke.

But you say, the ' main thing is the authority of Eusebius.'
This ought not to be so. For it is not reasonable to suppose
that Eusebius was fully master of the state of every province of
the Roman empire, almost three hundred years before his own
birth, scarce of any one. A learned Englishman might be
mistaken about the time of some governor of Jamaica, or
even of Ireland, who had lived two or three hundred years ago.
And it is likewise possible, that Eusebius, though honest in the
main, might have some partiality for the evangelical history.
Therefore he applied that passage, which relates to the taxation
after the removal of Archelaus, to the enrolment in St. Luke ;
that is, he was willing to have St. Luke's history confirmed by
a passage of Josephus, which makes express mention of Cyre-
nius : and therefore he took that, relating to Archelaus or the
time after his removal ; but very injudiciously, to say nothing
worse. For Eusebius, in that very chapter, places the birth of
Christ in the 28th year of Augustus, after the conquest of
Egypt, and the death of Antony. And according to all our
gospels, Jesus must have been born in the time of Herod, or at
least before the removal of Archelaus : how otherwise could he
have been crucified under Pontius Pilate, after a ministry of

LIFE OF DR. LARDNER. Ixxxi

some years, which ministry could not begin till he was thirty
years complete, or in his thirtieth year ?

You think it incredible, that there should be a taxing in all
Judea, in the time of Herod the Great. But how should there
be such a one afterwards ? when the land of Israel was divided ;
part made a province, part remaining under the government of
Herod the tetrarch, and his brother Philip. And if the taxation,
after the removal of Archelaus, affected the territories of
Herod the tetrarch, you allow taxations of dependent princes.
But indeed that census made by Cyrenius after the removal of
Archelaus was not universal, (for all the land of Israel,) nor
Would it have brought Joseph and Mary from Nazareth to Beth
lehem.

I see no good reason to call all the latter part of the first
chapter of Luke a parenthesis ; it is a part of his history, and
is quoted by Justin Martyr, and other writers of the second
century. Mary might keep some things and ponder them, and
be surprised, though she had before had general intimations of
them. Luke ii. 19, is one of these places, where she is said to
ponder, and with good reason. The song of the angels, which
breathes nothing but peace and good -will, the mean circum
stances of herself and her son at that time, might well lead her
to serious meditation. Again, ver. 33, Joseph and Mary had
reason to marvel, when Simeon spoke of the nature and extent
of this benefit, and went on also to hint the disgraces and suffer
ings of Jesus. Nor are these things contrary to those related
in the first chapter, but only some farther explications of things
there spoken by the same spirit, for the instruction of Joseph
and Mary, and the forming them to a becoming temper and
conduct. For, chap. i. ver. 75, the design of this blessing now
vouchsafed, is said to be, that we " might serve God in holiness
and righteousness."

In all the gospels Jesus is the king of Israel, and the son of
David. He no where disclaims these characters, though he
was not such a prince as some fondly expected and imagined,
and others maliciously charged him to be. Matt. xxi. 15.
There were many at the temple, who said, " Hosanna to the
Son of David ;" whom he justifies, though the Pharisees were
displeased. Matt. xxii. 42, &c. he speaks of the Messiah as
David's Son and Lord, so as to claim those characters to him
self.

Though Luke says nothing of the journey into Egypt, it may
have been performed according to the account in Matthew. The
words of Luke amount to no more than an omission of that
affair, without denying it to have been done. Such omissions
are common in the evangelists. Don't you, Sir, plainly perceive
many things related in St. John's Gospel, between the baptism
of Jesus, and the time when the other evangelists begin their
history of our Lord's public ministry ?

S

Ixxxii APPENDIX TO THE

In my Appendix it is largely shown that Herod died in the
Julian year 42, or 43 ; I have not determined which ; though I
suppose the arguments there proposed appear strongest for the
year 42. But the matter is of no great consequence, which of
those two years be right.

St. Luke's words concerning Cyrenius, ought, by no means,
to incline us to think, that he meant the census made in Judea
after the removal of Archelaus, but rather the contrary. These
words are a parenthesis, and you know, Sir, that they admit of
various senses. Whatever is the sense of that parenthesis, it
is probable that the design of it is, to distinguish the enrolment
there mentioned, from that made after the removal of Archelaus.

These things I submit to your consideration. I enlarge no far^
ther upon them to a person of your learning and judgment.

I am, Sir,

Your humble Servant,

N. LARDNER.

APPENDIX, No. V.

REMARKS UPON SOME DIFFICULTIES CONCERNING THE
CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE.

AS to the excellence and usefulness of the rules of Christianity,
several strong objections have been made. The substance of them
is as followeth.

Obj. In the gospel there are many excellent precepts ; but
since they are the effect of heavenly inspiration, should not they
have been rather supported with short and clear reasons, than
delivered in the way of authority ?

Ans. I. It cannot be improper for a person who has a hea
venly inspiration, or divine commission, to speak sometimes, or
even often, in the way of authority.

II. When our Saviour delivers precepts in the way of autho
rity, the fitness of so doing may be perceived. Particularly, this
is observable in the 5th chapter of St. Matthew's Gospel, where
he represents the design of his commission, and the nature of
his doctrine. The Jews expected not a reformation under the
Messiah, but great earthly advantages and great sensual indul
gences. He therefore says, Matt. v. 17, " Think not, that I
am come to destroy the law or the prophets. I am not come
to destroy, but to fulfil." The design of my commission is
not to abrogate or weaken, but rather to confirm, strengthen,

LIFE OF DR. LARDNER.

and enlarge the moral precepts and obligations contained in, or
taught by, the law and the prophets. Then, at ver." 21, " Ye
have heard that it has been said of them of old time, (it should
be rendered to the ancients, tppiQi) role apxaioie,) " Thou shalt not
kill." This is~ the sixth commandment, delivered by divine
authority in the law of Moses, forbidding in express words actual
murder only. And it is likely, that many of the Pharisees taught,
that forbearing the sin expressly forbidden in the law was suffi
cient. When, therefore, Christ taught the restraint or modera
tion of anger, as a necessary duty, and as a completing, fulfilling,
or enlarging that law ; was it not fit to speak in the way of
authority, as a divine teacher, furnished with a commission from
heaven, as he does, ver. 29 ; " But I say unto you, whosoever is
angry with his brother without a cause," and what follows. This
observation ought to be applied to the other precepts of the law
of Moses, afterwards insisted on, and in a like manner fulfilled
by our Saviour.

III. The laws or precepts of Christ being in themselves all
reasonable, need not to be demonstrated. When once they are
proposed with authority, the mind assents to them immediately ;
they have an internal and manifest reasonableness and equity.
Is not this evident in that rule, Matt. vi. 12, " Whatsoever ye
would that men should do unto you, do ye even so to them ?"
The reasonableness of all Christ's other precepts is alike evident.

IV. NevertheFess Christ does reason sometimes, and gives
such short and clear reasons as the objector requires. He heaps
up reasons in a concise manner against solicitude or anxiety.
Matt. vi. 25 — 34 ; and Luke xii. 15, he forbids covetousness in
these words : " Take heed, and beware of covetousness :" and
then adds that excellent reason, " For a man's life consisteth
not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth :" and
proceeds likewise to confirm and illustrate his doctrine by a pa
rable. And in a like manner often. Thus when, Matt. v. 33,
he improves or fulfils the precept or prohibition of the law,
which says, " Thou shalt not forswear thyself," and forbids
swearing at all, that is, in common conversation, he argues, and
by reason shows, the folly and wickedness of those mincing
oaths which were used by the Jews, who scrupled using the
name of God expressly, ver. 33 — 37. Ver. 34, " But I say unto
you, Swear not at all, neither by heaven, FOR it is God's throne,
nor by the earth, FOR it is his foot-stool ;" and what follows :
giving a reason against every one of those oaths, and showing
that they were each one of them equivalent to swearing by the
name of God : and, then, lastly, shows the wickedness of all
common swearing in ordinary conversation, ver. 37, " But let
your communication be yea, yea ; nay, nay ; FOR whatsoever is
more than these cometh of evil." This is the design of all the
context.

Obj. It is farther urged, that many things are forbidden in

Ixxxiv APPENDIX TO THE

the most strict and severe manner, which are innocent, indif
ferent, or however not directly criminal. Thus, calling Fool,
and Raca, are offences against which the judgment of hell-fire
are denounced. Looking on a woman and lusting after her are
equally culpable with committing adultery. Is the venereal act
more criminal than any other? Is it not equally natural and
necessary? Can we forbear liking an agreeable object ?

Ans. In the particulars first mentioned, Christ only forbids
that anger, which is really evil and unreasonable ; and those in
jurious and contemptuous expressions or names, which are
really improper and unbecoming, and which we ought not to
give each other at all, or not without very good and sufficient
reason. And then these, or somewhat like them, may be used
without contracting guilt. So St. Paul says, 1 Cor. xv. 36,
" Thou fool .-" and Christ says, Luke xiii. 32, " Tell that fox."
However, it may be observed, that the two words forbid by
Christ, are reckoned by commentators to be expressive of the
utmost contempt ; and therefore are not to be indulged by us.

As to what concerns the thing next mentioned, the objector
proceeds too fast. The original word used by Christ for WOMAN,
and the context, and every expression there made use of, shows
that our Lord is speaking of a married woman ; and the obvious
literal sense of the words is this ; ' That whosoever casts an
eye upon a married woman, so as to desire ' to have venereal
commerce with her, ' has committed adultery with her already
* in his heart.7 And is not this self-evident ? Have not all
mankind, that have been civilized, esteemed adultery a sin, or
injurious ? and if any action be criminal, the intention to do it
is also criminal ; and men who indulge criminal designs and in
tentions, must be guilty in the sight of God ; for God, who is
the governor of the world, and particularly of rational and in
telligent agents, is judge of thoughts as well as actions. Civil
magistrates can judge only of words and actions ; but God can
and does judge thoughts. All these things are evident beyond
dispute. And no wise and good man, but, when he knows a
woman is married, casts off his eye from her, or suffers not
concupiscence to arise, and if it does, checks and condemns it ;
and every man ought to do so.

Obj. How impracticable and intolerable are some other pre
cepts ? such as these, " Whosoever shall smite thee on the right
cheek, turn to him the other also. If any man take away thy
coat, let him have thy cloak also."

Ans. I. These precepts relate to s,mall matters.

II. They are hyperbolical and proverbial expressions, and not
to be explained or understood literally. That they are so, is
evident. 'Tis said, John xviii. 22, " And when he had thus
spoken, one of the officers which stood by, struck Jesus with
the palm of his hand." But our Lord does not offer himself to
receive another blow. On the contrary, he remonstrates against

LIFE OF DR. LARDNER. Ixxxv

the injury done him; ver. 23, " Jesus answered him, If I have
spoken evil, bear witness of the evil ; but if well, why smitest
thou me?" And St. Paul directs, 2 Thess. iii. 10, " We com
mand you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat :"
which sufficiently shows, that Christians need not be imposed
upon, though Christ has said, " Give to every one that asketh
thee ;" and St. Paul has earnestly taught diligence in the two
epistles to the Thessalonians, as well as in other places.

Obj. And are we not forbidden to take thought for the
morrow ?

Ans. The precept is, MIJ fiEpi/jvare ; be not anxious or solicitous ;
or, be not anxiously thoughtful, or careful ; — which is a reason
able precept.

Obj. In order to persuade to an unresisting submission and
subjection to governments of the most cruel and absolute kind,
is not the doctrine of the New Testament urged and pleaded ?

Ans. St. Paul's directions, Rom. xiii. and St. Peter's 1st Ep.
ii. 13, are very reasonable. There were some Jews at that time,
whom Christians were in danger of following, who refused obe
dience to heathen magistrates, especially to their inferior go
vernors and officers. The apostles therefore charge their con
verts to be obedient to magistrates of every rank. And, as ma
gistracy is necessary, and very useful, obedience thereto is very
reasonable, and submission must be earnestly recommended.
The apostles' instructions upon this head afford no support to
arguments for unresisting submission to cruel and absolute go
vernments, for their exhortations are founded in the benefit
of government. St. Paul says, " Let every soul be subject to
the higher powers — for rulers are not a terror to good works,
but. to the evil — for he is the minister of God to thee for good —
for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon
him that doth evil." — St. Peter: " Submit yourselves to every
ordinance of man for the Lord's sake ; whether it be to the
king, as supreme ; or unto governors, as unto them that are
sent by him, for the punishment of evil-doers, arid the praise of
them that do well." And it appears from the history in the
New Testament, that the Christians had a benefit from the
Roman magistracy at that time ; otherwise they would have
been destroyed by the rudeness of the common people, arid the
Jewish malice. But yet, that some Christians were in danger
of pernicious notions of liberty, like the Jews of that time, is
evident from what follows in the forecited context of St. Peter :
" As free, and not using your liberty for a cloak of malicious
ness," ver. 16. — St. Paul writes, 1 Tim. ii. 1, 2, that " prayers
should be made for kings, and for all that are in authority, that
we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and ho
nesty ;" or that we may, without disturbance, profess the prin
ciples of true religion, and practise the several branches of piety

1XXXV1 APPENDIX TO THE

and virtue. And certainly, if Christians desire peace and tran
quillity, and the protection of magistrates, they ought to be
peaceable, and behave as good subjects. Nor has the Christian
religion been prejudicial to civil liberty. Look abroad in the
world : Have the people more rights and privileges in Ma
hometan and heathen governments and constitutions than in
Christian ?

Obj. Hath Christianity had a more real and extensive influ
ence than philosophy ? The best precepts cannot command at
tention and regard. A plain useful rule is wanted, that may be
suited to the multitude.

Ans. I. Since the publication of the Christian religion, all im
moralities have appeared more glaring and odious than in
former times, which occasions complaints of misconduct and
miscarriages, that gave none, or little offence among heathen
people, though they were very common.

II. Men are always apt to complain of their own times, and
make unfair comparisons between the ancient and present or later
times. They take the bright side of the former, and the dark
side of the latter, and so compare them together.

III. Christianity has had a real and extensive influence (far
beyond philosophy) for reforming the manners and promoting
the happiness of mankind. What miseries did the people suffer
in the Roman republic ! How terrible were their triumvirates
and their proscriptions, and some other things at times, in an
age as philosophical and polite as any before it ! How barbarous
and shameful the Roman diversions in the amphitheatre ! 'Tis
to Christianity, which has abolished ancient heathenism, that
Mahometans owe their better sentiments. Christianity has abo
lished human sacrifices, and obliged parents to bring up their
children, which were formerly exposed in Greece and Rome
without mercy, and are so still in heathen countries. In the
city of Pekin, several thousand infants perish this way annually.
There is no such thing among Christians. If that number perish
in one city, how many through all the Chinese empire, and this
number counting on from year to year ? Christianity took with
the common people, or the multitude, in the first and purer
ages, and in a short time, without the aid of civil power, made
a progress, gained ground against superstition, which philosophy
did not ; had advantages of superstition, which philosophy never
had.

I have answered particular objections, I hope to satisfaction.
I desire leave to add some general observations.

Obs. I. It cannot be thought strange, that true religion, or a
teacher of true religion, should recommend great meekness,
forbearance, and a contempt of riches and honours. Many wise
men and philosophers have seen, that there is necessity that
good men bear and forbear ; and they have said great and fine

LIFE OF DR. LARDNER. Ixxxvii

things of the vanity of riches and honours, and such like advan
tages. Indeed all earthly things deserve little value, considering
their uncertainty, and the shortness of human life.

II. Christianity is reasonable throughout, or, to use a modern
phrase, it is a republication of the law of nature, with the two
positive appointments of Baptism and the Lord's supper, or the
Eucharist. Therefore all its precepts are to be taken in a rea
sonable sense. You are required to show no more meekness
than is fit and reasonable in this world of ours ; you may defend
yourselves, resist, remonstrate against all injuries, when you
have any prospect of advantage ; you may go to law, if the
thing you contend for be worth it, and you have a prospect of
success. But to resist, when you are in danger of perishing in
the attempt ; to go to law, when the thing desired will not re
pay the loss of time, if gained that way ; or to appeal to judges,
when they are ignorant, or partial and corrupt, what avails it ?
even though we have right, and the thing controverted be of some
importance. The disciples were obliged to the greatest exact
ness of behaviour, and to as much generosity and self-denial as
any men : yet our Lord teaches them to be wise as serpents, as
well as harmless as doves. St. Paul insisted on his privilege of a
Roman citizen, as often as it would be of any service. He
humbled the magistrates of Philippi, and defended himself
against the Jews to the utmost. In short, the Christian precepts
ought to be understood, as they are defined to be exactly suitable
to men in the present state of things.

III. Though the gospel be allowed to be only a republication
of the law of nature, it is of great advantage, because men,
through indolence, love of pleasure, or some other means, did
not trace out the great truths of religion, or the obligations of
virtue, by the exercise of reason ; and they needed to be awakened
and excited to the practice of what they did know.

IV. True religion could not be discovered or recommended
to men in a wiser and more effectual manner than it is, or has
been, in the Gospel of Jesus Christ : or, there are the greatest
advantages attending the method in which true religion has been
taught by Jesus Christ. To have published the precepts of re
ligion and virtue in a plain and clear manner, suppose, and
with some few plain and clear reasons, in the most solemn
manner conceivable, as the ten commandments at Mount Sinai ;
together with plain and express promises of future happiness ;
would not have been so effectual as the Gospel method. And all
the truths of religion, and precepts of happiness and virtue, are
better recommended and enforced by the example of Christ's
life, the patience, meekness, and fortitude of his death, and di
vine testimony to the truth, and his after resurrection, than by
the fore-mentioned method, or any other I can think of. How
ever, to this Gospel-method belongs (beside what has been al
ready mentioned) also the example of Christ's Apostles.

Ixxxviii APPENDIX TO THE

V. It was therefore fit, that the publisher, or republisher, of
true religion, with a commission from Heaven, should publish it
in some particular country, and, as a public preacher, be liable
to contradictions, opposition, and all kinds of sufferings, which
passionate and prejudiced men might be disposed to bring upon
him ; and no place or time could be more fit than the land of
Judea, and the time when Jesus appeared.

VI. It follows, that in order to understand true religion as
published in the Gospels, or the New Testament, men should
exercise their reason, and study the language, dialect, and cus
toms of the times when Christ and his Apostles preached, of
which times every one sees plain indications in the New Testa
ment itself. Therefore Christian clergy, and people, should
endeavour to be as knowing as they can.

VII. I shall add but one thing more to the honour of the
Christian religion ; that it is no enemy to learning, or any
branch of science, that I know of. All religion supposes men
rational : the Christian religion was published in a learned and
a polite age. St. Paul often recommends to Christians to have
the understanding of men ; he prays to God for them, that they
may increase in knowledge. Every branch of learning has flou
rished among Christians. More of them, I believe, have under
stood a variety of languages, than any had done before. Natural
philosophy has been cultivated by them. In the early age of
Christianity, there were such men as Clement of Alexandria,
Pantaenus ; Julius Africanus, Origen, with other learned men, in
the third century ; Eusebius of Cesarea, and Jerom, in the fourth ;
men acquainted with history, chronology, criticism, never since
such in spirit ; not to mention the many learned men of the later
ages, until the revival of learning in Christendom, about the time
of the Reformation,

APPENDIX, No. VI,

CHARACTER OF THE REV. MR. RICHARD LARDNER.

THE Rev. Mr. Richard Lardner was born at Portsmouth, May
28th, 1653, and educated for the ministry, by the Rev. Mr.
Charles Morton, of Newington -Green.

He entered upon his work in the year 1673, when he could
have no other worldly prospect, but bonds, imprisonment, and
the loss of all things, and which he was content to undergo ; and
accordingly had a large share in the sufferings of those times for
conscientious nonconformity.

LIFE OF DR. LARDNER. Ixxxi*

Having had early impressions of religion on his spirit, he
joined in communion with the church, under the pastoral care
of the reverend and learned Dr. Owen, whom he always men
tioned with the profoundest respect and veneration to his death.

His first settlement was at Deal in Kent ; but after some years
he removed- to London, and some other places ; in all which he
was greatly beloved, and, as we have reason to believe, had
many seals to his ministry, being made very useful for the con
version of some, and the edification of others, in the faith of the
Gospel.

He was a little man, but a bold and undaunted soldier of Jesus
Christ, being afraid of no dangers or difficulties in his Master's
work.

His manner of preaching was lively, masculine, awakening
like a son of thunder, and generally acceptable to the more se
rious part of his hearers, many of whom, and some yet alive,
have dated their first impressions of religion from his ministry.

It pleased God to continue him a great many years in his service,
till he might be justly esteemed the father of all the noncon
formist ministers in England. He was a preacher of the Gospel
for near sixty years, in all which time he was not only frequent,
but fervent and unwearied in his work, till the providence of
God, by a paralytic disorder, put an end to his labours in the
eightieth year of his age, but not to his life.

He was a close walker with God, throughout the whole course
of his long life, and always desirous to be useful. When it
pleased God to raise him a family, he was particularly careful,
not only for the temporal, but spiritual welfare of his children,
endeavouring to secure and promote it by frequent instructions,
and importunate prayers to God for them ; in all which we hope
his labour was not in vain with regard to any of them.

In the last seven years of his life, he had the pleasure of ob
serving the goodness of God in the growing hopes of his pos
terity, enjoying much peace and composure, while he endured
the consequences of his late disorder with an uncommon patience
and firmness of mind ; till at length, it pleased God to release
him from the infirmities of his present life, to a better, January
17th, 1740 ; in the 87th year of his age. So that it may be
said, in him have been fulfilled those words in the book of Job,
chap. v. 26, " Thou shalt come to thy grave in a full age, like
as a shock of corn cometh in his season."

xc

APPENDIX, No. VII.

LETTER FROM DR. SECKER, THEN BISHOP OF OXFORD, TO
DR. LARDNER ; WITH THE DOCTOR'S ANSWER.

St. James's, Westminster, December 6th, 1750.
Sir,

IF I had not of late been more engaged in business than ordi
nary, I should have returned you my thanks before now, for the
kind and, very acceptable present of your eighth volume. I
have only been able, as yet, to take a cursory view of some
parts of it : in doing which, I have been much pleased with
your insertion of the long citation, page 83, &c. with your
division of the sorts of books, page 108, <fec. and with your ex
cellent reasonings, page 124 — 137. As to the points, to which
you occasionally digress, page 19, &c. [ agree with you en
tirely in condemning all temporal punishments for any opinions,
which are consistent with the welfare of society ; all claims of
submission to the government of church governors, whether se
parate or assembled ; excepting such deference, as any one's
distrust of his own abilities, or learning, may reasonably incline
him to pay to guides set over him, whom he believes to be
faithful and skilful ; and, lastly, all terms of communion, which
are not necessary articles of Christianity, or indispensably re
quired by decency and order. What the terms, thus necessary
and requisite, are, all churches, and, so far as they are concerned,
all persons, must judge for themselves ; and there may be good
and important reasons to submit, even without remonstrating,
to what we do not approve ; provided we are not obliged to do
any thing which we apprehend to be unlawful. He who thinks
more things necessary, should neither treat those ill who believe
fewer, nor rank them with total unbelievers, nor entertain any
harsher opinion of the future state of either, than serious and
calm inquiry directs him to. And, on the other hand, he who
believes fewer things to be necessary, should not censure those
who believe more to be so, as tyrannical or uncharitable,
merely because they dare not acknowledge him to be what, ac
cording to the best judgment they can form, he is not. The
former of these faults I admit to be the more common : but the
latter is by no means without example, and ought to be con
scientiously avoided. The terms of admission to the ministry
may with reason, I think, be made straiter than those of com
munion. For doctrines not necessary, may be very useful : and
doctrines not destructive, may be very hurtful. And every
church, both particular and national, 'hath much reason, both

LIFE OF DR. LARDNER. xci

for its edification and its credit, to desire and endeavour to
have teachers, who hold and will inculcate the former sort, and
not the latter. Still a discreet moderation ought to be carefully
preserved in this manner, not only to prevent hypocrisy, but for
several other reasons. And yet, surely the danger of tempting
men to dissemble, is no more a sufficient objection against re
quiring some declaration, in this case, than in many that civil
life presents ; where, however, I acknowledge, that this practice
is carried much too far ; nor perhaps is there less danger, both
of dissimulation and farther inconveniences, in leaving every one
to declare himself in his own forms, than in proposing a form
to be subscribed. In either way, some will think more articles
proper, some fewer. And those of greater latitude should be
mild in their opinions of those who have less, as well as the con
trary ; and every one should labour to restrain and soften those,
with whom he has weight. Otherwise, not only at some times
power may be oppressive, as it often hath been ; but at others a
spirit of liberty may degenerate into one of bitterness, I had
almost said of persecution. — I have run on into a long letter
without designing it. In most, if not all, of what I have said, I
am persuaded you will agree with me. But I am sure you will
excuse me, if yoa see cause to think, as I hope you will, that the
whole proceeds from a sincere zeal for universal charity ; and a
firm belief that you have the promotion of it deeply at heart :
on which account, yet much more than on that of your great
learning, accuracy, and diligence, I am, with high esteem,

Sir,
Your very humble Servant,

THOMAS OXFORD.

To this Dr. Lardncr answered:

Hoxton Square, December 18th, 1750.

My Lord,

I AM greatly indebted to your Lordship for the favour of your
letter of the 6th instant, and think it no small honour done me,
that amidst your many engagements you have read so large a
part of my work. I have reason to be well pleased, that so
many things in it have obtained your approbation. It affords
me some special satisfaction that the reasonings at page 124 —
137 have not been disliked by your Lordship ; because I had
flattered myself with some hopes, they might be approved by
persons of good judgment. I am likewise obliged to your
Lordship for your free, candid, and charitable observations, re-

XC11 . APPENDIX TO THE

lating to the first chapter of this volume. It is very natural to
oppose that extreme which is most apt to prevail : there have
been particular persons, and some societies, that have advanced
and maintained great extravagances ; but oppressive power, on
one side or other, has been very common, and produced exten
sive mischief. In the early ages, when catholics and heretics
contended with reasons and arguments only, the juster senti
ments usually had the advantage ; which cannot be said of some
later times.

I take this opportunity to congratulate your Lordship on
your late preferment ; which, though it adds nothing to your
dignity, if it affords more leisure, may open a new sphere of
usefulness. And your Lordship, I hope, will think of making
more public some of those discourses, which have been heard
with so much attention and applause. If it may not be too
presuming, when I hear of your settlement at the deanery, I
will order a volume of plain discourses to be left there by the
bookseller. I am,

My Lord,

Your Lordship's

Most humble and obedient servant,

N. LARDNER.

APPENDIX, No. VIII.

LETTER FROM DR. DODDRIDGE TO DR. LARDNER.

Northampton, May 23rd, 1751.
Reverend and dear Sir,

AS soon as ever I had the honour of receiving the valuable
present you were so good as to send me, of the two volumes you
published toward the close of the last year, so elegantly bound,
which I esteem doubly as a memorial of the friendship of the
learned, pious, and generous author ; I desired our good friend
Mr. Neal to present you with my most respectful acknowledg
ments, but deferred writing to you myself till I had read them.
I set about the sermons immediately, and read three or four of
them every week till I had finished them ; but having been some
thing interrupted by my journey to St. Alban's, and the little
additional labour of publishing good Dr. Clarke's funeral sermon :
after such a delay, I waved writing to you, till ] might have an
opportunity of reading this last volume of the Credibility. But

LIFE OP DR. LARDNER. XC11I

really, Sir, the labour of my Family Expositor, added to the
other necessary business daily incumbent upon me, as a pastor
and tutor, with the necessity I have been under of answering
letters, of which I have since last Christmas received between
four and five hundred, has so entangled me, that it is but very
lately I have been able to secure the pleasure which that excel
lent volume had in store for me. And now my journey is so near,
that it may seem almost superfluous to write to you ; and yet,
under the load of such obligations to so worthy a friend, I cannot
bear to see his face till I have made this poor acknowledgment
of his goodness ; accept it, dear Sir, with your usual candour,
and be assured, that though I am not able to express it as I would,
I do actually feel a constant and deep sense of your goodness to
me, and, which is much more, of your continual readiness to
serve the public with those distinguished abilities, which God
has been pleased to give you ; and which have rendered your
writings so great a blessing to the Christian world. And I
heartily pray they may be yet more abundantly so, for promoting
the cause of virtue and piety, Christian principles, and a Christian
temper. In the interpretation of particular texts, and the manner
of stating particular doctrines, good men and good friends may
have different apprehensions ; but you always propose your senti
ments with such good humour, modesty, candour, and frankness,
as is very amiable and exemplary ; and the grand desire of
spreading righteousness, benevolence, prudence, the fear of God,
and a heavenly temper and conversation, so plainly appears,
particularly in this volume of sermons, that were I a much stricter
Calvinist than I am, I should honour and love the author, though
I did not personally know him. As to what you say of the coun
cil of Nice, I do not doubt but it will give umbrage to some who
look on its decrees as the great bulwark of the orthodox faith ;
but I see nothing solid that can be objected to your remarks, and
I think, there would have been much less Arianism in the world,
and much less mischief done by that which there is, if it had
been conducted in that more catholic manner you describe, as
what might have been wished ; and I have never seen any good
done by severe anathemas, and secular punishments, so awk
wardly listed into the service of Christianity, opposite as they are
to its true genius. Neither my time nor my paper will allow me
to enlarge, &c.

XC1V

APPENDIX, No. IX.

LETTER FROM DR. CHANDLKR TO DR. LARDNER, WITH
THE DOCTOR'S ANSWER.

Old Jury, December 4th, 1764.
Reverend and dear Sir,

WHEN I received your proposals, I determined to purchase the
work immediately on its publication, but am extremely obliged
to you for ordering it as a token of your respect to me, on whose
friendship and esteem I set, as I ought to do, the highest value.
I have read the whole through with care, and to my great satis
faction and improvement. The only thing in which I am not fully
satisfied, is your opinion about the testimony of Josephus con
cerning our blessed Saviour, which I have always bee n inclined to
think, as to the far greatest part of it, genuine. I have not time
to answer all the objections that are urged against the genuineness
of the testimony, but you will give me leave to make two or three
observations on the testimony itself.

That it is introduced with great propriety, as what happened
under Pilate's administration, and as what was one occasion of
the disturbances amongst the Jews in his time.

He testifies that * he was a wise man.'

Is uncertain ' whether he was not something more than a
' common man,' which is the meaning of the words, etye avdpa
avTov \tytiv ypri ; for Josephus, upon Jewish principles, could not
but think him a man, though he was uncertain whether he was
not somewhat greater ; a more extraordinary person, than any
mere man.

And your own quotation from Josephus, about Moses, that
' he was a man superior to his own nature/ page 158, accounts
for the character given to Jesus.

He says he was TrapadoZwv cpywv iroiTjrrjG. That the Jews them
selves, his contemporaries and enemies, acknowledged. Matt,
xiii. 54. — xiv. 2, &c.

' He was a teacher of such men as received the truth with
' pleasure.' You ask, would he call the Christian religion the
truth ? Yes certainly, as to the moral precepts of Christianity ;
which is all, 1 suppose, that Josephus knew or regarded of it.
Matt. xxii. 16.

' He drew over to him many Jews and Gentiles.' This
was true in the time when Josephus wrote. I refer you to
page 169 of your own excellent work, which justifies the ex
pression.

LIFE OF DR. LARDNER. XCV

* * This was the Christ.' 'O Xpi^og STOQ rjv. I render the words,

* This, viz. Jesus, was the famous, or remarkable Christ,' Jesus
was a common name, and would not have sufficiently pointed
him out to the Greeks and Romans. The name "by which he
was known to them was, Chrestus, or Christus ; as in Sue
tonius and Tacitus ; and if Tacitus had read Josephus, as you
justly think he had, I imagine he took this very name from
Josephus. Josephus did not certainly believe him to be the
Messiah, and therefore, when he wrote this history, he could
never mean by Christus the Jewish Messiah, of which the
Greeks and Romans knew nothing ; but that he was the re
markable Christ, who was the founder of that people who
were called Christians. This appears to me to be the real
meaning of the expression, and as such it was intelligible to the
Heathens.

In the period that follows : * When Pilate at the instigation,
&c.' to the words, * did not cease to adhere to him ;' the whole
is true, and what might be said by any man, though not a Chris
tian, who was acquainted with his history.

The next words, ' for on the third day, &c.' if he speaks only
of what were the common sentiments of his followers, they may
be allowed to be this. But, to speak my mind freely, I think
them rather an interpolation of Eusebius, or some other Christian ;
and that the connexion in Josephus runs thus.

' They who before had conceived an affection for him, did
' not cease to adhere to him ; and the sect of christians, so called
' from him, (the *O Xpfe-oc,) subsists to this day.' Such an addition
he could not well avoid :

As to the remarks on the expression TWV XpiTiavwv $v\ov, that
0uXoi' is here put for sect, or must necessarily signify sect, I am
not thoroughly clear in it. Josephus certainly uses the word
$v\ov frequently for nation, but I think also sometimes with
greater latitude. Thus in a quotation from Strabo, he tells us,

T07TOV UK £71 paSlCJf tVQtlV TTJQ OlKSfitVIJQ, OQ 8 irapadtStKTCtl THTO TO 0U\OJ/,

not ' this nation,' which is too extensive, but as it is in the Latin
version, * hoc genus hominum,' line 14. cap. 7. page 695. I also

find in Dion Cassius, TSQ (BaXevriKs 0v\a yeyfvr](jievsQ. ' Qui sunt

senatoria origine.' Vol. ii. page 912, edit. Reimari. &v\ov eSvoe
•yevog. Hesychius. Why then may we not render the words in
Josephus Xpinavwv <j>v\ov, ' the sort of people called christians ?'
And I think it is not unlikely that Josephus should add, * that
* they subsisted to his own time,' when he wrote this history,
A. C. 93.

Give me leave just to add, that this paragraph, concerning
Jesus, doth not seem to me so much to interrupt the course of
the narration as is complained of ; it is introduced under the
article of Pilate, and placed between two circumstances which
occasioned disturbances. And was not the putting of Jesus to
death, and the continuance of the apostles and disciples after

XCV1 APPENDIX TO THE

Jiim, declaring his resurrection, another very considerable circum
stance, which created very great disturbances ? And though
Josephus does not expressly say this, and perhaps had good
reasons for not saying it, yet he intimates it, by placing it be
tween the two causes of commotion, by giving so honourable a
testimony to Jesus, and telling us, that he was crucified at the
instigation of the chief persons of the nation. It would scarce
have been decent in him to have said more on this head.

I have sometimes thought that this passage was originally in
Josephus, and that Josephus himself omitted it afterwards in
some other copies, at the desire of some of his own nation, as
containing too honourable an account of Jesus, or that they
falsified some other copies by omitting it ; and I think, as you
allow, with great reason, his testimony to the Baptist to be
genuine, it is not to be accounted for, that he should wholly
omit to say any thing of Jesus.

But I beg your pardon for giving you the trouble of so long a
letter, especially as what I have urged may appear to be of
little weight. I own I cannot wholly give up the passage, and
yet I feel the weight of your objections against it. Your book
will ever remain a solid proof of your learning, candour, and
good judgment ; and I pray God continue your life till you have
finished your design, and every other view for the service of reli
gion. 1 am, with the sincerest affection and esteem,

Reverend and dear Sir,

Your greatly obliged, and
most humble Servant,

SAMUEL CHANDLER.

To this Dr. Lardner answered:

Reverend and dear Sir,

I AM much obliged to you for your friendly and valuable letter
of December 4, and for all your arguings therein upon the sub
ject ; which you have urged with great force, arid to the best
advantage : and 1 will further consider. In the mean time, you
may be sensible, that I cannot be easily moved from an opinion,
which I have long held' agreeable to the sentiments of very judi
cious critics.

The testimony of Josephus to the fulfilment of our Saviour's
predictions in the destruction of Jerusalem, is invaluable. His
accounts rof the state of things in Judea, before the commence
ment of the war, and during the ministry of our Saviour and his
apostles, are also very valuable, indeed above all price. But I

LIFE OF DR. LARDNER. XCVll

do not perceive, that we at all want the suspected testimony to
Jesus, which was never quoted by any of our Christian ancestors
before Eusebius. Nor do I recollect that he has any where
mentioned the name, or word, Christ, or Messiah, in any of his
works, except the testimony above mentioned, and the passage
concerning James the Lord's brother. If you recollect any place,
where Messiah is mentioned by him, let me know it. If that
word is never to be found in him elsewhere, he must have de
signedly and studiously declined it ; for he had many occasions
to mention it. It therefore is unlikely he should produce that
word in speaking of Jesus. Explain the term as you please, it
must be unaccountable, that it should be brought in here. This
I now mention to you ; but, as before said, I will further weigh
your reasons.

You seem to be well acquainted with an argument proposed
in a Dissertation, &c. published at Oxford some years ago, and
ascribed to Dr. Nathaniel Foster. I shall be obliged to you,
if you have leisure, to inform me whether that Dr. Foster be
still living, and what are his preferments : if he be dead, what
was his station, and of what other works was he author. For
possibly I may be obliged publicly to make some remarks upon
his discourse. If I do, a farther acquaintance with the writer of
it will be expedient. For there have been several of that name,
Foster.

Wishing you continued success in your studies and public
labours, I remain, with the sincerest regard,

Your friend and servant,

N. LARDNER.
December 31st, 1764.

APPENDIX, No. X.

OBSERVATIONS ON THE TESTIMONY OF JOSEPHUS.

COMMUNICATED BY THE REV. MR. HENLEY.
TO THE REV. DR. KIPPIS.

Rendlesham, Suffolk, Dec. 4th, 1786.
Sir,

THE testimony of Josephus concerning CHRIST having been
considered in a new point of view, since the death of Dr. Lard-
fa

xcviii APPENDIX TO THE

ner, by my learned friend the Abb6 du Voisin, (who hath lately
quitted the divinity chair, which he had filled for several years
in the Sorbonne, with the highest reputation,) I take the liberty
of transmitting to you his communication upon that subject, as
a valuable Supplement to Dr. Lardner's remarks ; and, at the
same time, to subjoin the late Abbe Bullet's observations, which
I doubt not will be the more acceptable to the public, as Dr.
Lardner was long anxious to avail himself of the book which
contains them, [Histoire de 1'Etablissement du Christianisme,
tir6e des seuls Auteurs Juifs et Pay ens, &c.] but was never able
to procure it.

I am, Sir,

With great respect,

Your obedient Servant,

S. HENLEY.

" MANY critics, since the time of Osiander, Blondel, Ta-
naquil Faber, and Le Clerc, have suspected, but, in my opinion,
unwarrantably, the authenticity of this celebrated testimony :
for — 1. It is extant in all the copies of Josephus, both unpub
lished and published. Baronius, Annal. Ecclesiastic, ad an.
134, relates, that a manuscript of this historian's Antiquities
was found in the library of the Vatican, translated into Hebrew,
in which this passage was marked with an obelus ; a thing
that could have been done by none but a Jew. In an Arabic
version preserved by the Maronites of Mount Libanus, the
narrative exists entire : see the new edition of the Bibliotheque
Francoise de Duverdier, par M. de Brequigny. — 2. This testi
mony of Josephus has been applauded by Eusebius, (Hist. Eccle
siastic, lib. i. c. 10. — Demonstrat. Evangelic, lib. iii. c. 5.) Jerom,
(Catal. Script. Ecclesiastic.) Rufinus, (Histor. lib. i.) Isidorus of
Pelusiurn, Sozomen, Cassiodorus, Nicephorus, and many more,
who all indisputably had seen various manuscripts, and of con
siderable antiquity. — 3. The style of the passage so exactly
resembles the other writings of Josephus, that, to adopt the
expression of Huetius, one egg is not more like to another. Proofs
of this assertion may be seen in the dissertation of Daubez, sub
joined to Havercamp's edition. — 4. Josephus not only mentions,
with respect, John Baptist, (Antiquit. lib. xviii. c. 1.) but also
James : * Ananus assembled the Jewish Sanhedrim, and brought
' before it James the brother of Jesus who is called Christ, with
' some others, whom he delivered over to be stoned, as infractors
' of the law.' Lib. xx. c. 8. This passage, the authenticity of
which has never been suspected, contains an evident reference
to what had been already related concerning Christ ; for why
else should he describe James, a man of himself but little known,
as the brother of Jesus, if he had made no mention of Jesus

LIFE OF DR. LARDNER. XC1X

before ? — 5. It is highly improbable that Josephus, who hath
discussed with such minuteness the history of this period — men
tioned Judas of Galilee, Theudas, and the other obscure pre
tenders to the character of the Messiah — as well as John Bap
tist and James the brother of Christ — should have preserved the
profoundest silence concerning Christ himself, whose name was at
that time so celebrated both amongst the Jews and the Romans.
But in all the writings of Josephus not a hint occurs on the sub
ject, except the testimony in question. — 6. Let no one persuade
himself that this passage was forged either by Eusebius, who first
cited it, or any other earlier writer ; for the Christian cause is not
only so far from needing any fraud to support it, that nothing
could be more destructive to its interest, more especially a fraud
so palpable and obtrusive.

It has been objected by Blondel, That what is here related of
Christ could not possibly have been recorded by Josephus, who
was not only a Jew, but rigidly attached to the Jewish religion :
viz. * That Christ could scarcely be said to be a man,' that is,
that he was God, that he was a performer of wonderful works, a
teacher of truth; moreover, Christ, or the Messiah, whom the pro
phets had foretold ; and, finally, who appeared on the third day
restored to life. These are not the expressions of a Jew, but a
Christian.

To this however it may be answered, That Josephus was not so
addicted to his own religion, as to approve the conduct and
opinion of the Jews concerning Christ and his doctrine. From
the moderation which pervades his whole narrative of the Jewish
war, it may be justly inferred, that the fanatic fury which the chief
men of his nation exercised against Christ, could not but have
been displeasing to him. He has rendered that attestation to the
innocence, sanctity, and miracles of Christ, which the fidelity of
history required. Nor does it follow that he was necessitated to
renounce, on this account, the religion of his fathers. Either the
common prejudice of the Jews, that their Messiah would be a
victorious and temporal sovereign, or the indifference so prevalent
in many, towards controverted questions, might have been suffi
cient to prevent him from renouncing the religion in which he
had been brought up, and embraced a new one, the profession
of which was attended with danger : or else, he might think
himself at liberty to be either a Jew or a Christian, as the same
God was worshipped in both systems of religion. On either of
these suppositions, Josephus might have written every thing which
this testimony contains. By the expression, ' if it be right to
' speak of him as a man,' it is not meant to imply that Christ is
God, but only an extraordinary man, one whose wisdom and
works had raised him above the common condition of humanity.
He represents him as ' a performer of wonderful works,' because
miracles were wrought by him, as the Jews themselves were
obliged to confess. He styles him « an instructor of those who

C APPENDIX TO THE

' gladly received the truth,' both because the moral precepts of
Christ were such as Josephus approved, and also because the
disciples of Christ were influenced by no other motive than the
desire of discerning it. The phrase, ' this man was Christ/ or
rather, o Xpi<rog «ro£ rjv. ' Christ was this man,' by no means inti
mates that Jesus was the Messiah, but only that he was the
person called Christ both by the Christians and Romans, amongst
whom Josephus wrote : just as if he should say, in our language,
' this was the same man as he named Christ.' As to the re
surrection of Christ, and the prophecies referring to him, Jose
phus rather speaks the language used by the Christians, than his
own private opinion ; or else he thought that Christ had ap
peared after his revival, and that the prophets had foretold this
event : a point which, if admitted, and he had been consistent,
ought to have induced him to embrace Christianity. But there
might be many circumstances to prevent his becoming a prose
lyte, as every one will readily imagine ; nor is it either new or
wonderful, that men, especially in their religious concerns,
should contradict themselves, and withstand the conviction of
their own minds. It is certain that, of our own times, no one
hath spoken in higher terms concerning Christ than the philoso
pher of Geneva, who nevertheless, not only in his other writings,
but also in the very work which contains this most eloquent
eulogium, inveighs against the Christian religion with acrimony
and rancour.

It has been further objected, That no person before Eusebius
ever mentioned this testimony ; neither Justin in his dialogue
with Trypho the Jew ; nor Clemens Alexandrinus, who made
so many extracts from ancient authors ; nor Origen against
Celsus ; but, on the contrary, in the 35th chapter of the 1st book
of that work, Origen openly affirms that Josephus, who had men
tioned John Baptist, did not acknowledge Christ ; and therefore
it is inferred, that before the age of Eusebius this testimony had
no existence in the copies of Josephus.

To this it may be answered, That there is no strength in this
negative argument against Eusebius, drawn from the silence of
the ancient fathers. The fathers did not cite the testimony of
Josephus, either because they had no copies of his writings; or,
because his testimony was foreign to the scope of their own ; or
because it could be of little use, especially in the earliest times,
when the miracles of Christ were admitted by the Jews at large ;
or, because that for this very testimony the evidence of Josephus
was disregarded by the Jews themselves. To this last considera
tion Justin apparently alluded, when he thus addressed himself
to Trypho : ' Ye yourselves know, O Jews ! that Jesus is risen
' again and ascended into heaven, according as the prophets
' foretold.' What Origen asserted was not, that Christ was un
known to Josephus, but only that Josephus did not acknowledge
him as the Christ or Messiah, iTjaw a Karade^a^voQ etvai XjOtrov, and

LTFE OF DR. LARDNER.

in his Commentary on Matthew, KCU rot ye
by which words it is manifest, that Jesus was known to Josephus,
but not admitted by him to be the Christ, or Messiah. Thus
much, however, Origen might say in perfect consistency with the
passage in question, where the name of Christ, as hath been al
ready observed, is an appellative, without ascribing to him who
bore it the character of the Messiah, expected by the Jews."

A more diffuse and minute discussion of this subject may be
seen in a dissertation by the excellent Vernet, professor of divinity
at Geneva, entitled, Traite de la Verite de la Religion Chretienne,
torn. ix. Lausanne, 1782 ; and in Mr. Bryant's Vindiciae Flavianae,
or a Vindication of the Testimony given by Josephus concerning
our Saviour Jesus Christ. Printed for White, 1777. I mention
the latter publication more particularly, as not only coinciding in
many points with the preceding observations, but also as having
made several converts, amongst whom Dr. Priestley, I have un
derstood, may be mentioned as one. If, however, the defence
set up by these learned writers shall be still thought insufficient,
let us take the converse of the position, and consider the conclu
sions drawn from it by the late Abbe Bullet.

"I. JOSEPHUS, who was born about three or four years
after the death of Jesus Christ, could not be ignorant that there
had appeared in Judea a charlatan, impostor, magician, or pro
phet, called Jesus, who had either performed wonders, or found
the secret of persuading numbers to think so. He could not but
know that, in his own time, there still were in that province
many who acknowledged this man as their master. When he
was himself carried captive to Rome, it must have been notorious
to him, that Nero had punished, in the most extraordinary and
unheard-of manner, a great number of christians in that city ;
he must have been aware, that their martyrdom had been ex
hibited as a spectacle to the Roman people, and was a spectacle
of so uncommon a kind, as to have been recorded by Tacitus
and Suetonius in the annals of the empire. He must have seen
that, under Domitian, the christians were prosecuted both in
Rome and the provinces, and put to death publicly by the orders
of the emperor.

II. Ought not Josephus then to have taken some notice of Jesus
and his disciples, in his history ? Or did he think the subject too
inconsiderable to occupy a place in it ? That he did not, may be
concluded from the following reasons :

1. In the time of this historian, the christians were of them
selves so numerous a society as to engage the attention of the
Roman emperors. These sovereigns of the world enacted edicts
against them, devoted them to death, and caused the magistrates
every where to pursue them. The faith of history, therefore, re
quired that they should not be passed over in silence. Thus
thought Tacitus and Suetonius, to whom the christians, as a sect,

Cll APPENDIX TO THE

were a much less interesting object than to a Jew, like Josephus.
These two historians considered the rise and establishment of
Christianity as of sufficient magnitude to rank amongst the great
events transmitted by them to posterity.

2. Josephus in his Antiquities, book xviii. c. 2, has mentioned
three sects among the Jews, the Essenes, the Sadducees, and the
Pharisees ; though the two last had ceased to exist after the down
fall of their nation, and at the time when he wrote. He ought
not then to have been silent in respect to the sect of Christians,
which had been formed among the Jews, and not only subsisted
in his own time, but had increased in a very different manner
from the others he had mentioned, and was extended through
the various provinces of the empire, and the capital itself; whilst
they had scarcely exceeded the confines of Judea.

3. Josephus has given an accurate account of all the impostors,
or heads of parties, which arose amongst the Jews, from the
empire of Augustus to the ruin of Jerusalem.

He relates, that Judas of Galilee stirred up the Jews to an
insurrection against the Romans; Antiq. book xviii. c. 1. And
also, that the president Tiberius Alexander caused the two sons
of this insurgent to be crucified. Book xx. c. 5.

He recounts that an impostor assembled the Samaritans upon
mount Gerizim, under the pretence of discovering to them the
sacred vessels which Moses had there buried.

He speaks of the preaching of John Baptist, and the con
course of people which flocked to hear him. He bears record to
the sanctity of his life : and adds, that the Jews believed the
defeat of Herod's army by Aretas king of the Arabs, to have been
a punishment for the crime he had committed in putting this holy
man to death. Book xviii. c. 7.

He relates that an impostor, named Theudas, seduced a great
number of the Jews, and led them towards Jordan, under the
promise that he would divide the river, and make them pass over
dry-foot. Cuspius Fadus, president of Judea, having received
notice of this expedition, despatched a party of soldiers, who
slew Theudas, and brought back his head to the president.
Book xx. c. 2.

He mentions that Felix, president of the province, having taken
by stratagem Eleazar the son of Dinaeus, the leader of a large
gang of banditti, sent him in chains to Rome. Book xx. c. 6.

He recounts that an Egyptian, coming to Jerusalem, gave
himself out for a prophet, and persuaded a mob to follow him
to the mount of Olives, where they should see the walls of Jeru
salem fall down at his command ; but that Felix, on hearing of
it, put himself at the head of the troops which were then in the
city, and charging the misguided populace, killed four hundred,
and took two hundred prisoners. The Egyptian having saved
himself, was heard of no more. Book xx. c. 6.

He subjoins a narrative of a pretended magician, who drew

LIFE OF DR. LARDNER. ciii

the people into the desert, by promising them that under his
conduct they should be safe from every kind of evil. The pre
sident Festus sent troops against them, which defeated and dis
persed them. Book xx. c. 7.

Jesus was the founder of a party much more considerable, and
which occasioned much greater noise, than all those whom this
author has mentioned. These impostors, these ringleaders, these
men who had collected mobs, had no followers beyond the pre
cincts of Judea ; their partizans and adherents were soon dis
persed, and at the time when this history was written, nothing
but the bare remembrance of them remained. It was far differ
ent with the sect, the assemblies, and community which Jesus had
formed ; it not only subsisted in the time of the historian, but was
extended through every province of the empire, and flourished in
the very capital. The sovereigns of the world exerted all their
authority to suppress it. This party or sect, then, deserved, far
more than all the others together, to have been noticed by Jo-
sephus in his history.

Josephus could not be ignorant of Jesus, nor the sect which
had been founded by him : how then, consistently with the laws
of history, and the method which he had prescribed to himself,
of recording every thing he knew, could he preserve an entire si
lence on this head ? Let us try to solve this aenigma.

Either this historian believed, that all which the disciples of
Jesus had said of their Master was false, or else was true. If
false, he could not have remained silent ; every thing would
have stimulated him to speak out on the occasion ; the interest of
virtue ; zeal for his own religion, the foundations of which the
christians had sapped by their impostures ; the love of his own
nation, whom the disciples of Jesus accused and upbraided with
having, from a malignant and cruel jealousy, put to death the
Messiah, the Son of God. By exposing the impostures of the
apostles, Josephus must have overwhelmed with confusion the
enemies of his own people ; have ingratiated himself most effec
tually with his nation ; conciliated the favour of those emperors
who persecuted the growing cause of Christianity ; attracted the
applauses of all who looked with horror on this new superstition ;
and undeceived the christians themselves, whom the first disciples
of Jesus had so miserably misled. Can any person for a moment
believe, that a man able to expose so gross an imposture, and
who had so many powerful inducements to do it, should, in spite
of every incitement, persevere in the most obstinate silence ;
especially when so natural an occasion solicited him to speak ? If
false miracles were propagated for the purpose of seducing the
people of our days, with what zeal, with what ardour would our
writers march forth to detect the imposture, and prevent the se
duction ! Should we not regard their silence, on such an occasion,
as a criminal prevarication ? It appears then indisputable, that
if Josephus had believed the relations of the apostles, concerning

civ APPENDIX TO THE LIFE, &C.

their Master, to have been false, he would have taken care to de
clare his conviction : but, if he did not believe them to have been
false, he must have known them to be true; and, for fear of dis
pleasing his nation, the Romans and their emperors, held his
peace. In this case, his silence is of more importance than his
testimony, and equally serves to authenticate the truth of those
facts upon which Christianity is founded."

THE

CREDIBILITY

GOSPEL HISTORY,

OR,

THE FACTS OCCASIONALLY MENTIONED IN THE NEW

TESTAMENT CONFIRMED BY PASSAGES OF ANCIENT

AUTHORS, WHO WERE CONTEMPORARY WITH

OUR SAVIOUR, OR HIS APOSTLES, OR

LIVED NEAR THEIR TIME.

APPENDIX,

CONCERNING

THE TIME OF HEROD'S DEATH.

PART I.

VOL. I.

PREFACE.

WHATEVER argument is insisted on in behalf of Christi
anity, whether the purity of its doctrine, the fulfilment of
ancient prophecies, the predictions and miracles of our
Saviour and his apostles, or the peculiar circumstances of
its propagation : it is necessary, that we be apprized of the
truth of the things related in the New Testament.

The evidence of the truth of any history is either internal
or external. The internal evidence depends on the proba
bility of the things related, the consistence of the several
parts, and the plainness and simplicity of the narration.
The external evidence consists of the concurrence of other
ancient writers of good credit, who lived at, or near the
time, in which any things are said to have happened ; and
who bear testimony to the books themselves, and their au
thors, or the facts contained in them.

Every serious and attentive reader is able, in a great
measure, to judge of the internal marks of the credibility
of the history contained in the New Testament : though he
may be very much assisted by the observations of others,
who are more curious, or more judicious than himself. And
for this purpose many excellent writings have been pub
lished with very great advantage in our own, and other
modern languages.

The external evidence of the truth of any ancient history,
and particularly of the gospel-history, lies not so much
within the reach of the generality of mankind. And though
in some modern defences of the Christian religion, there
have been appeals and references made to other ancient
authors ; yet those appeals have not been so distinct, full,
and express, as might have been wished. The writer has
supposed his readers learned ; and, not producing at length
the testimonies he appeals to, the faith of the unlearned, as
to this part of the evidence for Christianity, is still resolved
very much into the credit and authority of the apologist.

The peculiar design of this work is to enable persons of
ordinary capacities, who, for want of a learned education,
or of sufficient leisure, are deprived of the advantage of

4 PREFACE.

reading over ancient writings, to judge for themselves con
cerning the external evidence of the facts related in the
New Testament.

At present I offer only the evidence of the facts occasion
ally mentioned in the books of the New Testament, intend
ing hereafter to treat of the principal facts in a like manner.

The method taken in this work is to set down in the first
place the representation, which the sacred writers have given
of persons, facts, customs, or principles ; and then to pro
duce passages of other ancient writers, which confirm or
illustrate the account delivered in the New Testament.

Wherever the matter treated of is of any special import
ance, and wherever there is any ambiguity, or any peculiar
beauty or emphasis in the style and expression of the au
thors I quote, I have placed their original words at the
bottom of the page.

There are added likewise, here and there, some short
notes for the benefit of the unlearned reader.

I presume it is needless for me to acknowledge particu
larly, that I am accountable for the translations of all the
passages here transcribed : or to declare, that I have used
the best care I could about them. I may have mistaken,
but I am sure, that I have not, with a view to any particu
lar purpose whatever, designedly misrepresented any fact,
or given a wrong turn to any passage. My putting down
the original words of my authors, or very particular refer
ences to them, will prevent all suspicions of this kind.

The reader is not to suppose, that I have exhausted the
argument. The geography of the New Testament, and
many facts, customs, and principles, besides those here
insisted on by me, are also confirmed by testimonies of
ancient writers. I apprehend, however, that what is here
offered is sufficient to answer the end proposed. And
though the positive part be not full and complete, and
indeed could not be so without being tedious ; yet I think I
have, in the second book, taken in all the chief difficulties
affecting that kind of facts I am now concerned with.

The point I was to make out is the Credibility of the
Gospel-History. And to that I have confined myself. But
no one may hence surmise, that I give up the inspiration of
the books of the New Testament. Nor am I aware, that I
have in the least weakened any argument, that they were
written under a special direction and influence of the Spirit
of God. I think, however, that if the Gospel History be
credible, the truth of the Christian religion cannot be con
tested.

ADVERTISEMENT, &C. 5

I flatter myself, my design will be approved. I wish
the execution had been equal to the subject. Imperfect as
it is, I hope what is here performed, may be of use to re
move, or abate the prejudices of some ; to confirm others
upon a good foundation in the belief of the Christian reli
gion, and in their high esteem for the writers of the New
Testament, and to enable them to read them with new plea
sure and profit.

ADVERTISEMENT

CONCERNING THE SECOND EDITION,,

I NOW allow, that the words of St. Luke, chap. ii. 2. are
capable of the sense in which they are understood by
Herwaert and Perizonius. But as I still dispute most of
the examples alleged by those learned men in support of
that sense, there is but a small alteration made in that
article. The Rev. Mr. Massona has given me occasion to
consider afresh what I had said concerning Macrobius's
passage. I hope what is now added will be to his and
others' satisfaction. I have also taken this opportunity to
add some farther observations on Josephus's silence about
the slaughter of the infants at Bethlehem. But the most
important addition, is a curious observation on Josephus
concerning the Egyptian impostor, which I received from
Mr. Ward. These and the few other alterations and addi
tions made in this edition, can need no apology with those
who understand the nature of this design. And as they
are printed by themselves, and may be had separate, I hope
the first edition is not much prejudiced hereby.

HAVING in the folloicing work made great use of Philo
and Josephus, I here prefix a short account of those two
writers.

PHILO was a Jew, of Alexandria in Egypt, brother b of
Alexander the Alabarch, or chief magistrate of the Jews in
that country. The Jews having been much abused by
the Egyptians, and by Flaccus, the Roman president, in

a See his Slaughter of the Children in Bethlehem, as an historical Fact,
vindicated, &c. In the dedication to the Bishop of Coventry and Litchfield.
b Joseph. Antiq. 18. c. 9. sect. 1.

6 A SHORT ACCOUNT OF PHILO AND JOSEPHUS.

the year of our Lord 39 or 40, Philo with others was sent
to Caligula, the emperor, in the name of the whole Jewish
people living in Alexandria. The embassy consisted of c
five, and hed has assured us himself, that he was the eldest
and most experienced person among them. It is reasonable
to conclude therefore, that he was born at, or before the
commencement of the Christian sera. He was eminent for
his wit and learning, as well as for his family. Many of his
writings are still remaining, though some have been lost.
The two books which I have chiefly quoted, are his dis
course against the forementioned Flaccus, president of
Egypt, and his account of the embassy to Caligula.

JOSEPHUS, the Son of Matthias, of the race of the priests,
by his mother descended from the Asmonean family, which
for a considerable time had the supreme government of the
Jewish nation, was born at Jerusalem in the first year of
thee reign of Caligula, A. D. 37. In the beginning of the
Jewish war he commanded in Galilee. Vespasian, then
general under Nero, having conquered that country, Jose-
phus became his prisoner, and continued with him as long
as Vespasian staid in those parts. When Vespasian, upon
his being declared emperor, went to Rome to take posses
sion of the empire, Josephus staid with Titus, was present at
the siege of Jerusalem, and saw the ruin of his city and
country. Josephus afterwards settled at Rome, and obtain
ed the freedom of the city from Vespasian. Some time
after the destruction of Jerusalem, he wrote his history of
the Jewish war in seven books. After that he wrote in
twenty books the Jewish antiquities, or, history of the Jews
from the creation of the world to the twelfth of Nero, in
which year the war began. This work he finished in the
56th year of his own age, in the 13th year of the reign of.
Domitian, A. D. 93. Besides these, we have his life,
written by himself, and two books against Apion, an
Egyptian author, who had calumniated the Jewish1 people.
The works of Philo and Josephus were written in the
Greek language.

c Philo de legat. p. 1043. C. d Ibid. 1018. C. e In vit. sect. 1.
f Vid. Antiq. 20. c. 10. Vit. sect. 75, 76. De Bell, in Procem.

AN EXPLICATION OF SOME TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS.

A. U. or, Anno Urbis, is the year of the foundation of
the city of Rome, according1 to Varro's account.

The Julian year is an epoch, so called from Julius Ceesar.
The first year of this epoch, when Caesar's reformation of
the Roman year took place, commences the first of January,
A. U. 709.

A. D. Anno Domini, or the year of our Lord, or the vul
gar Christian aera. According- to this account our Saviour
was born Dec. 25. Julian year 45. A. U. 753. But the
computation does not begin till the year following, viz.
January 1. Julian year 46. A. U. 754. This computation
all writers, as well as others, follow. But learned men are
sensible it is defective. Our Saviour was born in the reign
of Herod the Great. But it is certain, that Herod died
before the passover, A. U. 752 ; very probable in A. U.
750, or 751.

The Reigns of the Roman Emperors, during the Period
of the Evangelical History.

A.U. A.D.

Augustus having reigned from the death of Julius 1

Caesar 57 years and some months, and from the > August 19. 767- 14.

defeat of Mark Antony at Actium 44 years, died)

Tiberius began his reign - August 19. 767- 14.

Caius Caligula March 16. 790. 37.

Claudius January 24. 794. 41.

Nero October 13. 807- 54.

Nero died June 9. 821. 68.

Galba ) •__.., ( June 9. A. D. 68. ) f Jan. 15. )

Otho >• *£. 3 Jan. 17. 69. Uo^ Apr. 16. \- 822. 69.

Viteffius J ( Jan. 2. 69. j ( Dec. 21. j

Vespasian reigned from July 1. A. D. 69. to June 24. - - 832. 79.

INTRODUCTION.

THE History of the New Testament hath, in an eminent
degree, all the internal marks and characters of credibi
lity. The writers appear honest and impartial. They
seem to have set down very fairly the exceptions and
reflections of enemies, and to have recorded without reserve
the weaknesses, mistakes, or even greater faults, which they
themselves, or any of their own number, engaged in the
same design with them, were guilty of. There is between
the four evangelists an harmony, hitherto unparalleled be
tween so many persons, who have all written of the same
times or events. The lesser differences, or seeming con
tradictions, which are to be found in them, only demonstrate
they did not write with concert. The other parts of the New
Testament concur with them in the same facts, and princi
ples. These are things obvious to all who read the books
of the New Testament with attention. And the more they
are read, the more conspicuous will the tokens of credibility
appear.

But it must be an additional satisfaction, to find that
these writers are supported in their narration, by other
approved authors of different characters, who lived at or
near the time, in which the facts, related by the evangelists,
are supposed to have happened.

It is plainly the design of the historians of the New Tes
tament to write of the actions of Jesus Christ, chiefly those
of his public ministry ; and to give an account of his death
and resurrection, and of some of the first steps, by which
the doctrine he had taught, made its way in the world.
But though this was their main design, and they have not
undertaken to give us the political state or history of the
countries in which these things were done; yet in the
course of their narration, they have been led unavoidably
to mention many persons of note ; and to make allusions
and references to the customs and tenets of the people,
whom Jesus Christ and his apostles were concerned with.

Here are therefore two kinds of facts, principal, and oc-

INTRODUCTION. 9

casional. The principal facts are, the birth and preaching
of John the Baptist ; the miraculous conception and birth,
the discourses, miracles, predictions, crucifixion, resurrec
tion, and ascension of Jesus Christ ; the mission of the
apostles, the descent of the Holy Ghost upon them, and the
other attestations which were given to the divine authority
of Jesus Christ, and the truth of his doctrine. The things
occasionally mentioned are the estate and character of the
princes and governors, in whose time these events are
placed; the state of the Jews, their opinions, and practices,
and also those of other people, to whom the apostles came.

The facts related in the New Testament are all (except
some few mentioned in the book of the Revelation) sup
posed to have come to pass before the destruction of Jeru
salem, which happened in the seventieth year of the Chris
tian sera. And these historians do throughout maintain the
character of persons perfectly well acquainted with the
matters of which they write.

Two of these books, the gospels of Matthew and John,
bear the names of persons, who are said to have been pre
sent at a good part of those transactions, which they give
an account of. Mark writes as one fully master of his
subject, and Luke affirms, expressly, that he " had per-
" feet understanding of all things from the very first,"
Luke i. 3. and that he was able to write in order of those
things he undertook to relate. In these four pieces we
have the history of between thirty and forty years, from the
vision of Zacharias in the temple at Jerusalem, to .the
ascension of Jesus Christ.

Besides these, we have also a book called the Acts of
the Apostles, ascribed to the last mentioned WTiter ; in
which is contained the history of many wonderful events,
which followed the resurrection and ascension of Jesus
Christ. If he had perfect understanding of all things from
the very beginning- of the gospel of Christ, he may be well
supposed thoroughly acquainted with these late events, as
nearer his own time. And indeed in a great part of this
work he sustains the character of an eye-witness.

Omitting, for the present, the particular consideration of
the principal facts of this history, and the direct and positive
attestations given to the truth of them (as well as to the
genuineness of these writings) by a great number of persons,
who lived near the time in which they are supposed to
have happened ; and who, after a serious and diligent
inquiry, were convinced of the truth of them, and upon the
ground of that persuasion renounced the principles of their

10 INTRODUCTION,

education, and ever after constantly maintained and con
fessed the truth of the facts and principles contained in
these books, with great hazard of their ease, reputation,
estates and lives : I shall now take a view of those facts only,
which are occasionally mentioned in the New Testament ;
and inquire into the external evidences of the truth of
them.

If it appear from other writers, that our sacred historians
have mistaken the people and affairs of the time, in which,
according" to their own account, the things they relate
happened ; it will be an argument that they did not write,
till some considerable time afterwards. But if upon inquiry
there be found an agreement between them and other
writers, of undoubted authority, not in some few, but in
many, in all the particulars of this kind which they have
mentioned ; it will be a very strong presumption that they
wrote at, or very near the time, in which the things they
relate are said to have happened.

This will give credit to the other, the main parts of their
narration. An history written and published near the time
of any events is credible, unless there appear some particu
lar views of interest ; of which there is no evidence in the
present case, but quite the contrary.

The history now before us, is the history of many great
and wonderful works done in some of the best peopled and
most frequented parts of the earth. They are related with
very particular circumstances of time and place, and some
of them are said to have been done in the presence of great
numbers of people. Here is withal an account of proceed
ings and sentences of courts of judicature, in cities of the
first rank, at times of the greatest and most general resort ;
and of some discourses made before persons (next under
the Roman emperor) of the highest rank and distinction. One
manifest design of the whole is to overthrow the religious
tenets, then generally received in the world. It is written
in the language, not of some obscure kingdom, but of a
learned and numerous people, understood at that time by all
the polite, and by many others in every part of the known
world. For any men to publish such an history of such
things as lately done, if not punctually true, could have
been only to expose themselves to an easy confutation, and
certain infamy.

I propose therefore to give a long enumeration of parti
culars, occasionally mentioned by the writers of the New
Testament, in which they are supported by authors of the
best note ; and then in answer to divers objections, I shall

INTRODUCTION. 1 1

endeavour to show, that they are not contradicted in the
rest.

If I succeed in this attempt, here will be a good argument
for the genuineness of these writings, and for the truth of the
principal facts contained in them ; distinct from the express
and positive testimonies of Christian writers, and the conces
sions of many others.

THE

CREDIBILITY

OF THE

GOSPEL HISTORY,

PART I.
BOOK I. CHAP. I.

OF PRINCES AND GOVERNORS MENTIONED IN THE
NEW TESTAMENT.

J. Herod. IT. Archelaus. III. Herod the Tetrarch, and
Philip. IV. Herod the Tetrarch, and Herodias. V.
Lysanias, Tetrarch of Abilene. VI. Herod (Agrippa.)
VII. Felix and Festus. VIII. Felix and Drusilla.
IX. Agrippa (the younger.) X. Bernice. XL Sergius
Paulus, deputy of Cyprus. XII. Gallio, deputy of
Achaia.

THE first thing' I would observe is, that Josephus and hea
then authors have made mention of Herod, Archelaus,
Pontius Pilate, and other persons of note, whose names we
meet with in the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles ; and
have delivered nothing material concerning* their characters,
posts, or honours, that is different from what the writers of
the New Testament have said of them.

I. St. Matthew assures us that " Jesus was born in Beth
lehem of Judea,in the days of Herod the king," Matt. ii.
whom St. Luke styles expressly " the king of Judea," Luke
i. 5. Herod was the son of Antipater, who had enjoyed
considerable posts of honour and trust under Alexander
lannaeus, and Alexandra his wife and successor in the civil
government of Judea, and their eldest Son Hyrcanus ; who
was high priest in his mother's lifetime, and after her death,
had the civil power also united in him.

Nicolas of Damascus says, that Antipater was descended

14 Credibility of the Gospel History.

from one of the chief of the Jewish families that returned
into Judea from Babylon. But Josephus makes no scruple
to declare, that Nicolas said this, only to flatter Herod, who
came to be king of Judea ; and that in truth he was an
Idumean.a

These Idumeans were a branch of the ancient Edomites,
who, as Dr. Prideaux b has observed, * while the Jews were
' in the Babylonish captivity, and their land lay desolate,
6 took possession of as much of the southern part of it, as

* contained what had formerly been the whole inheritance
' of the tribe of Simeon, and also half of that, which had

* been the inheritance of the tribe of Judah ; and there
4 dwelt ever after, — till at length going over into the religion
' of the Jews, they became incorporated with them into the
' same nation.'

Josephus gives this account of their conversion. ' Hyr-
' canus took also Adora and Marissa, cities of Idumea : and
' having subdued all the Idumeans, he permitted them to
' remain in the country, upon condition they would be cir-
' cumcised, and use the Jewish laws. Rather than leave
' their native land, they received circumcision, and submit-
' ted to live in every respect as Jews. And from that time

* they became Jews.'c

This happened in the 129th year before the Christian
sera.d Consequently Herod was a Jew though not of the
ancient stock of Israel.

Moreover Josephus calls Judea, Antipater's native coun
try.6 And the Idumeans in the Jewish war * promised to

* defend the house of God (at Jerusalem) and fight, for their
' common country.' fAnd the Jews themselves allowed
Herod to be a Jew* Whilst Felix was procurator of Judea,

* there arose a dispute between the Jews and Syrians that
' dwelt in Csesarea concerning the equal rights of citizen-
' ship. The Jews thought they ought to have the prefer-

a Joseph. Ant. lib. 14. cap. 1. sect. 3. Edit. Huds.

b Connection, Part. II. Book iii. p. 199. Oct. Edit. 1718.
. c Ypicavog Se Kai Tijg Idovpaiag aipn 7ro\eig Ado>pa Kai Mapi<r<rav' Kai cnrav-
Tag TOVQ iSspaisg vTroxeipisg Troirjaaptvog tirtTpvfyiv avToig iitvtiv tv Ty x<*>pa,
« irtpiTefAveiv re ra ai^oia, Kai TOIQ Isdaioig voftoig xprjcrOai StXoitv' 61 8e
TToQty Ttjg Trarpta ytjg Kai TTJV TrepiTOfjirjv Kai Tt]v a\\t)v TS (3is diaiTav
VTrtfieivav Trjv avTrjv IsSaioig TroirjffaffOai' KaKtivog avToig
wore tivai TO \OITTOV IsSaioig' Ant. lib. 13. cap. 9. sect. 1.

d Prideaux's Conn. P. II. Book v. p. 307.

e Kai Trpwrov fiev TO rei^og ai/e^ti/iaro Tijg TraTpidog VTTO Hofjnrrjis Kare-rpa/i-
uevov de Bell. J. lib. i. c. 10. p. 979. v. 28. vid.

p. 979. v. 28. vid. etiam ibid. v. 21. f Trj-
Idsfiaioi TOV OLKOV TS Gee, Kai TIJQ KOIWTJQ
ibid. lib. iv. p. 1180. v. 43.

Princes and Governors mentioned in the New Testament. 15

' ence, because the founder of Caesarea, Herod their king,
1 was a Jew.'8

Herod obtained the crown of Judea upon occasion of a
difference between two branches of the Asmonean family.
Hyrcanus had been for a considerable time prince and high
priest of the Jewish nation. But whilst the Roman empire
was in an unsettled state after the death of Julius Csesar,
Antigonus, son of Aristobulus, brother of Hyrcanus, by means
of some friends he had amongst the Jews, and by the assist
ance of the Parthians, made himself master of Jerusalem,
and all Judea, and took Hyrcanus prisoner, who was put
into the hands of the Parthians.h

Hereupon, Herod, who had been governor of Galilee under
Hyrcanus, and whose interests had hitherto depended entirely
upon him, set sail for Rome. All he then aimed at, was to
obtain the kingdom for Aristobulus, brother of his wife
Mariamne, by his father, grandson of Aristobulus, and by
his mother, of Hyrcanus. But the senate of Rome, moved
by the recommendations of Mark Antony and some reasons
of state, conferred the kingdom of Judea upon Herod.1

Having had this unexpected success at Rome, he returned
with all expedition to Judea ; and, in about three years'
time, got possession of the whole country. Antigonus was
taken prisoner, sent to Antony, and by him put to death at
Herod's request.k ' He (Herod) reigned after the death of
' Antigonus thirty-four years, and from the time he was
' declared king by the Romans thirty-seven.'1

He died of a very painful and loathsome distemper; in
somuch that, as Josephus says, ' Some then pronounced it

* to be a judgment of God upon him for his many im-

* pieties.'01

II. St. Matthew informs us, that Joseph, having been
sometime in Egypt, by divine direction, " arose, and took
the young child, and his mother, and came into the land
of Israel. But when he heard that Archelaus did reign in
Judea, in the room of his father Herod, he was afraid to go
thither : notwithstanding, being warned of God in a

g Hepi HjoTToXiTeiag. Ot piv yap Isdaioi Trpwrtvav rjZisv, Sia rjo TOV
KTI^IJV rrjQ Ka«rap£ia£ Hpw^jjv awrwv flaaiXea ytyovtvai TO yivog Isdaiov.
Joseph. Ant. lib. xx. cap. 7. sect. 7.

h In the year before the Christian sera, 40. l Joseph. Ant. lib. xiv.

c. 14. de Bell. lib. i. c. 14. k Ant. lib. xiv. cap. ult. de B. Jud. lib. i.

cap. 18. i Ant. lib. xvii. 8. sect. 1.

?£ rag tTTiuaovTag iroivtjv nvai Tk)v (T<o0i<ra*y TO. .

de B. J. lib. i. cap. 33. p. 1041. v. 6. eXtytro av VTTO TUV S«a£oi/rwv, /cae
oif Tavra TrpoaTro^Ofyyto-Oai <ro^ia Trps/CEiro, TTOIVJJV TS TroXXs dvaaeflsQ rav-
rrjv o Otoe tHTTrpafrafGQai Trapa rs j&miXfwg. Ant. lib. xvii. C. 6. sect. 5.

16 Credibility of the Gospel History.

dream, he turned aside into the parts of Galilee," Matt. ii.
21, 22.

By which words it is implied, not only that Archelaus
succeeded Herod in Judea properly so called ; but also
that his power did not reach over all the land of Israel, and
particularly not to Galilee.

Josephus has informed us, that Herod, usually called the
Great, by his last will and testament, which he made a little
before his death, appointed Archelaus his successor in
Judea, with the title of king" ; and assigned the rest of his
dominions to Herod Antipas, and Philip, excepting only
some small part, which he gave to his sister Salome.
However, the disposal of all was left to the determination
of Augustus. This will the emperor ratified, as to the
main parts of it. Archelaus was decreed successor to his
father in Judea, Samaria, and Idumea, with the title of
ethnarch : but was not to have the title of king, till he
should do somewhat to deserve it. Herod Antipas was ap
pointed tetrarch of Galilee and Peraea ; and Philip, of
Trachonitis and the neighbouring countries."

If Joseph returned out of Egypt immediately after the
death of Herod, I presume no one will except against the
propriety of the expression here made use of, that Archelaus
reigned. For his father had in his last will appointed him
his successor with the title of king. If this return out of
Egypt be supposed not to have happened, till after the
decree of Augustus was passed, by which Archelaus was
forbid as yet to use the style of king ; yet no just exception
will lie against St. Matthew's phrase. For Josephus himself,
who has given us an account of this limitation, calls Arche
laus, the king that succeeded Herod.0 And he has used the
verb reigning concerning the duration of his government.?
And what in one place he calls a tetrarchy, in another, he
calls a kingdom.^

St. Matthew says, that " when Joseph heard that Arche
laus did reign in Judea, he was afraid to go thither." There
must have been some particular reason for this fear, and
for his " turning aside into the parts of Galilee," (by virtue
of a pure choice of his own, or of a new direction from

n Jos. Ant. lib. xvii. c. 8. sect. 1. de Bell. lib. i. c. 33. sect. 7. 8. et lib. ii.
cap. 6. sect. 3. — Et gentem coercitam, liberi Herodis tripartite rexere. Tacit.
Hist. lib. v. cap. 9.

0 O £7riKara<ra0ei£ avTtj) (3aai\£vg Ap^fXaoe viog wv. Antiq. 1. xviii. p. 802.
V. 16, 17. p QTC flaaiXtvffsiv \itv avrov TOV TWV ^a^vujv apiOftov' de

B. lib. ii. c. 7. p. 1059. vid. etiam p. 789. v. 23. et p. 904. v. 20 q T^v
Avffavis r£rpap%iav. p. 818. V. 27. (3aai\eiav TTJV Avffavis KaXs}ifvr]v' p. 1071.
v. 14.

Princes and Governors mentioned in the New Testament. 17

heaven ;) though Galilee also was in possession of one of
Herod's sons.

Some may infer from hence, that Archelaus must have had
a bad character in Judea, even in his father's lifetime. And
there are divers particulars in Josephus, which may con
firm such a suspicion.

After his father's death, and before he could set out for
Rome, to obtain of Augustus the confirmation of Herod's
last will ; the Jews, upon his not granting some demands
they made, became very tumultuous at the temple. And
he ordered his soldiers in among them, who slew above
three thousand ;r which was reckoned a great piece of
severity, in the beginning of his reign, or rather whilst he was
but a private person : for many reckoned him no more, till
the succession was confirmed by Augustus.

As Archelaus went to Rome, so did Herod Antipas, and
almost all the rest of the family. When they came thither,
Herod made interest for Archelaus's share, which was called
the kingdom : and the whole family favoured Herod's
pretensions, * not out of any love to him, but out of hatred
1 to Archelaus.'8

After Archelaus had left Judea, with the leave of Quintilius
Varus, president of Syria, -an embassy of fifty of the chief
men of Jerusalem was sent to Rome, in the name of the
whole nation, with a petition to Augustus, that they might
be permitted to live according to their own laws under a
Roman governor : and when they came to Rome, they were
joined by above eight thousand Jews who lived there.
They arrived before Augustus had given his sentence upon
Herod's will. When he gave Archelaus and this embassy
an audience, none of the royal family would attend Archelaus
to support his interest ; such was their aversion to him.

* Nor did they join in with the embassy, being ashamed
' to oppose so near a relation in the presence of Augustus.' i

* And in the tenth year of his government,11 the chief of

* the iews and Samaritans, not being able to endure his
« cruelty and tyranny, presented complaints against him to

< Caesar. Augustus, having heard both sides, banished

< Archelaus to Vienna in Gaul, and confiscated his treasury/ v

r Ant. lib. xvii. cap. 9. sect. 3. s ETTH 8* «e PWv a^Kiro (Avrnrac,)
Kai TTCIVTWV TUV ffvyyevuv a7ro<rratn£ r\v Trpog CLVTOV, UK ivvoiq. ry eiceiva,
/item 3t TV irpog ApxeXaoV ibid. sect. 4. * QTTOOOI dt (rvyytvcie r\aav

Trpog BacriXfwg, Ap%£\a^> p.ev owTtra^Qai diet fjuaog TO irpos avrov v^tpuv,
TOIQ Se Trptffflwiv opo-^rityEiv KO.T avra deivov riysvro, tv aiayvvQ Ty avrwv
oiopevoi yevt](Tea9ai Trapa Katcrapt tear avSpog oitceia rotate Trpaaativ TrooOv-
u Antiq. lib. xvii. cap. 13. sect. 1. ' u A. D. 6 or 7.

v AtKctry St (Tti rr)£ apx»?£ Ap^fXaa, 01 Trpwroi ruv afoXrfwv avtipuv tvre

VOL. I. C

18 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Indeed, he seems to have been the worst of all Herod's
sons, except Antipater, whom Herod had put to death five
days before his own decease.

As the evangelists have said little concerning our Saviour
after his return out of Egypt, and settlement in Galilee, till
the time of his public ministry, when the government of Judea
was in other hands, we find no farther mention made of
Archelaus by them.

III. But of the two other sons of Herod between whom
the other half of his dominions was divided, we have mention
made long after this. For St. Luke says, Luke iii. 1, that
when " the word of God came to John, in the fifteenth year
of Tiberius, Herod was tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother
Philip tetrarch of Iturea, and the region of Trachonitis."
That is, they were then in possession of the same territories
and titles, which were assigned them by their father's last
will, and Augustus's decree. And it was this same Herod,
tetrarch of Galilee, to whom our Saviour was sent by Pilate,
Luke xxiii. 6, 7, when he was accused before him.

That Philip was tetrarch of Trachonitis, in the fifteenth
year of Tiberius, we are assured by Josephus, who says,
that ' Philip the brother of Herod died in the twentieth year
* of Tiberius when he had governed Trachonitis, and Batanea,
6 and Gaulanitis thirty-seven years.' w

And Herod continued tetrarch of Galilee, till he was
removed by Caligula, the successor of Tiberius.x

IV. Of this Herod some other things are related, namely,
his marrying" Herodias and beheading John the Baptist.
These are mentioned by several of the evangelists, Matt. xiv.

1—13, Mark iv. 14—29, Luke iii. 19, 20. 1 shall only

set down St. Mark's account. " For Herod had sent forth
and laid hold upon John, and bound him in prison, for
Herodias' sake, his brother Philip's wife ; for he had married
her. For John said unto Herod, It is not lawful for thee to
have thy brother's wife : therefore Herodias had a quarrel
against him, and would have killed him, but she could not.
For Herod feared John, knowing that he was a just man

and an holy, and observed him. And when a convenient

day was come, that Herod on his birth-day made a supper
to his lords, high captains, and chief estates of Galilee :
and when the daughter of the said Herodias came in and

Isfiaiotg KO.I Sajuapsiratf firj fytpovrtQ rrjv w/jioTijTa avrs Kin rvpawiSa, KCITIJ-
yopovaiv avrs CTTI Kaicrapof — Kai 6 Kac<rap aQiKOfjLevs CTTI rivuv KciTrjyopwv
dKpoarai Kai avrs \£yovro£, Kai ticeivov fiev Qvyada tXavvti, d&£ oiicrjrtipiov
a.vTqt JSitwav TTO\IV rrjg FaXanaf* ra Be ^p^juara aTTTjvey/caro" ibid. cap. 15.
sect. 2. w Antiq. lib. 18. c. 5. sect. 6. x Ibid. c. 8. sect. 2.

Princes and Governors mentioned in the New Testament. 19

danced, and pleased Herod, and them that sat with him, the
king said unto the damsel, Ask of me whatsoever thou wilt,
and I will give it thee. And he sware unto her, Whatso
ever thou wilt ask of me, I will give it thee, unto the half
of my kingdom." Mark vi. 17—23.

This unlawful marriage is recorded in Josephus. * About
this time there happened a difference between Aretas, king
of Petraea, and Herod, upon this occasion. Herod the
tetrarch had married the daughter of Aretas, and lived a
considerable time with her. But in a journey he took to
Rome, he made a visit to Herod, y his brother; thougii not
by the same mother, for Herod was born of Simon's the
high-priest's daughter. Here falling in love with
Herodias, the wife of the said Herod, (daughter of their
brother Aristobulus, and sister of Agrippa the Great, he
ventured to make her proposals of marriage. She not
disliking them, they agreed together at this time, that
when he was returned from Rome, she should go and live
with him. And it was one part of their contract, that
Aretas's daughter should be put away.'2
Josephus speaks again of this marriage in another place,
from which it appears likewise, that Herodias had a daugh
ter by her first husband. She is generally supposed to be
the person, whose dancing so much entertained Herod, the
tetrarch. Giving an account of Herod's children and
grand-children he says : * Herodias was married to Herod,
son of Herod the Great, by Mariamne, daughter of Simon
the high-priest. They had a daughter whose name was
Salome, after whose birth, Herodias, in utter violation of
the laws of her country, left her husband then living, and
married Herod the tetrarch of Galilee, her husband's bro
ther by the father's side.'a

y Josephus here calls Herodias's first husband Herod. The Evangelists call
him Philip. This difficulty will be considered amongst the objections.

z Ev Tarty Se <za<na£sffiv Apsrag re 6 ETcrpcuof (3a<ri\fvg KCCI Hpwfoje, dux
Toiavrrjv ainav. Hpwfojg 6 TfTpapxrjg ya/m rtjv Apera Suyartpa, Kai cvvr\v
Xpovov riBrj TTO\VV° rfXXo/xfVOf ft ETU Pw/^//£ Karayfrat tv Hpwtfs aSeXfys ovrog
ov% bfjiopriTpis' (K yap TI\C, Si/xwvog TS apxieptwg 3-vyarpog Hpw^g tyeyova'
fpaaOeig St Hpw£ia£o£ Ttjg TSTS -yvvaiKog, SvyaTrjp Si r\v Api<zo(3s\s, KO.I drog
ade\<j)OG O.VTWV, AypiTTTrs $£ a^t\<prj TS jWEyaXs, roX/ia Xoywv aiTTe&Qai Trept
•yap,(i)v' Kai deZafitvijg, avvOrjicai yivovTai fiETOiKicraaOai rrpog O.VTOV, oTrort cnro
PwjjiriQ TrapaytvoiTO' rjv 6e tv TO.IQ <rvv9r)Kai£, wre Kai TS Apera TI\V SvyctTepa
CKjSaXfii/. Antiq. 18. C. 6. sect. 1. a Hpw^tctf de CIVTW rj a$t\<j>r] ytjfjifTai

Hp<t)dy Hpco^a TS fieyaXs iraidi, og yryovtv tK Mapia/ivj^f TTJQ TS Si/iwvo^
TS apxitpeuQ, icat avroig SaXw/i); yivsrai, p.& fa Tag yovaq Hpw&ctf, nri
ffvyxvcrti <f>povt]<raaa TWV Trarpiwv, Hpa>5y ya/it€irai TS avdpog T<p 6/xo7rarpi<^
adfXffHp, ^laTaera ^wvroc. T?jv de FaXiXatwv TfTpap\tav ei%(v ovTog. ibid,
sect. 4.

20 Credibility of ike Gospel History.

It may, perhaps, be expected, I should here produce an
instance about that time, of some lady of a like station
with Herodias's daughter, who danced at a public enter
tainment. But I must own, I am not furnished with any
instance exactly parallel. And I should conclude from this
very story, as related by the evangelists, that this dance
was a very unusual, if not a singular piece of complaisance.
If it had been a common thing, it is not to be supposed that
Herod would have thought of requiting it with so large a
present as half his kingdom.

However, the daughter of the said Herod ias, having
received from Herod a solemn promise, confirmed by an oath,
that he would give her " whatsoever she should ask of him,"
and she having' withdrawn and advised with her mother,
Mark vi. 25, 27, 28, " came with haste unto the king, arid
asked, saying, I will that thou give me by and by in a
charger the head of John the Baptist. — And immediately the
king sent an executioner, and commanded his head to be
brought : and he went and beheaded him in the prison.
And brought his head in a charger, and gave it to the damsel,
and the damsel gave it to her mother. "

At the time of this event, it was common for princes to
require the heads of eminent persons, whom they ordered for
execution, to be brought to them, especially where there was
any particular resentment.

We have an instance in Josephus, which follows the story
of this marriag'e. Aretas was extremely provoked at the
treatment of his daughter, and at length a war broke out
betwixt him and Herod. A battle was fought, and Herod's
troops were defeated. 4 Herod sent an account of this to
' Tiberius ; and he resenting the attempt of Aretas, wrote
' to Vitellius to declare war ag'ainst him, with orders, that

* if he were taken prisoner he should be brought to him in

* chains, and that if he were slain his head should be sent
« to him.'b

Agrippina, then wife of Claudius, and mother of Nero,
who was afterwards emperor, sent an officer to put to death
Lollia Paulina, who had been her rival for the imperial
dignity. And Dio Cassius says, that when Lollia's head was
brought to her, not knowing it at first, she examined it with
her own hands, till she perceived some particular feature,
by which that lady was distinguished.0 I have put down

b Ant. lib. 19. cap. 6. sect. 1. c Kat rrjvye Uav\ivav rv\v AoXXiav,

e\Trida riva eg TV]V TS KXavSis avvoiKujaiv £<T%r]K6v, cnrficTeive. TI\V rs.
avTrjQ KO^Qtiaav avry, \ir] yvupiaaaa, TO, re <ro/za avrrjg ai>rox«pip
f KCII T&g ofiovrac; toTceiparo, tfiwq TTW^ t^ovraf. Dio. lib. lx. p. 686.

Princes and Governors mentioned in the New Testament. 21

this instance, because it seems to give us the reason of this
practice among* great people, namely, that they might be
certain their orders had been executed.

Josephus has represented Herodias as a woman full of
ambition and envy, as having a mighty influence on Herod,
and able to persuade him to things he was not of himself
at all inclined to. It is on occasion of the emperor Caligula's
advancing her own brother to the government of the countries
that had belonged to their uncle Philip ; and that not with
the old title of tetrarch, which he had, but with the more
honourable character of king. d Upon this, ' Herodias, sister
' of Agrippa, wife of Herod, tetrarch of Galilee and Peroea,
' envied her brother's power, when she saw him in a more
4 honourable station than -her husband.'6 The historian
proceeds to relate, that she persuaded her husband to go
into Italy, that he might obtain the same title. He was
averse at first : however at length she prevailed upon him to
undertake the journey. But the emperor was so far from
granting his petition, that upon some informations he received
concerning him, he took away from him the tetrarchy of Gali
lee, and gave it to Agrippa, the brother of Herodias, who had
been the object of her envy ; and moreover banished Herod
to Lyons in Gaul, whither this wife of his also followed him.
Josephus concludes his account with this reflection : ' This

* punishment did God inflict on Herodias for envying her

* brother, and on Herod for following the vain counsels of a

* woman.' f

I have set down thus much of their story here, because it
may serve to give us a clear idea how things passed be
tween Herod the tetrarch and Herodias ; and may satisfy us,
the evangelists have not been mistaken in representing her
as the first mover in the barbarous usage, which John the
Baptist metwith.s

E. Hanov. 1606. lisdem consulibus atrox odii Agrippina ac Lolliae infen-
sa, quod secum de matrimonio principis certavisset. — In Lolliam mittitur tri-
bunus a quo ad mortem adigeretur. Tacit. Ann. xii. c. 22.

d Ant. xxviii. cap. vii. sect. 10. fin. e Hpw£tae <$' 77 aSfXtyrj r«

AypiTTTrs, ovvoiKSffa T3.pudy, rtrpapx»?e de OVTOQ r\v TaXiXaiae /cat
tyQovq TOV afo\08 Tf\v sZsaiav tdextTO, opwo-a fv iroXv fifi^ovi a£tw/iari
fitvov avtipoq TS avrrjg. ibid. cap. 8. sect. 1. f Hpwciiadt p

TS Trpog TOV aBtXtyov, Kai Hpw^/j yvvaiKtiiov aKpoaoaptv^ /cs^oAo
ravTTjv f.iriTi\ir\atv 6 6fOf. ibid. sect. 2.

s NOTE. There is now in Josephus's works a paragraph [Ant. lib. xviii. cap.
6. sect. 2.] in which the death of John Baptist by Herod is related, though
Herodias is not mentioned as the cause of it. But some learned men suspect
ing the genuineness of this paragraph, I have no right to make use of it here,
where I intend to produce nothing but what is unquestionably genuine. And,
I think, we have no need of it.

22 Credibility of the Gospel History.

V. I have now said what is sufficient concerning Herod
and Philip, two of the princes in whose time St. Luke says,
John the Baptist commenced his ministry. All the rest will
be more properly considered in some other places, except
Lysanias, tetrarch of Abilene ; of whom there is noh dis
tinct account in any of the ancient writers, which we now
have in our hands. But if the reader will be pleased to
observe some passages, which will be produced imme
diately concerning the two Agrippas, he will be convinced
there must have been about this time some prince of this
name, who was tetrarch of Abilene.

VI. We may now proceed to another of Herod's family,
of whom St. Luke has given us a very remarkable history.

" Now about that time, Herod the king stretched forth
his hands, to vex certain of the church. And he killed
James the brother of John with the sword. And because he
saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded farther to take Peter
also. Then were the days of unleavened bread." Acts
xii. 1—3.

St. Luke calls this person Herod, by the family name ;
Josephus calls him Agrippa. He was grandson of Herod the
Great. His father was Aristobulus, Herod's son by Mariamne,
grand-daughter of Hyrcanus : and is the same person who
has been already mentioned as brother of Herodias. St.
Luke gives him the title of king, and relates several acts of
sovereign authority done by him. He does not say expressly,
that they were done by him at Jerusalem : but there are divers
particulars in the relation, which plainly determine that to
be the scene of action. For St. Luke observes, that when
he took Peter, " then were the days of unleavened bread ;
and that he intended, after Easter, to bring him forth to the
people." And that when Peter was out of prison, " and
was come to himself, he said, (ver. 11.) Now I know of a
surety, that the Lord — has delivered me out of the hand of
Herod, and from all the expectation of the People of the
Jews." And when he had " commanded the keepers to be
put to death, (ver. 19.) " he went down from Judea to
Caesarea, and there abode." A passage or two from Josephus
will contirm the representation St. Luke gives of Herod's
being king, and that of Judea.

It was by several steps that he was advanced to this
dignity. His first preferment was from Caligula, A. D.
3?. ' And sending for him to his palace, he [Caligula] put
' a crown upon his head, and appointed him king of the

h Vid. Casaub. Exercit. in Bar. xii. 3. et Vales. Annot. ad. Euseb. Hist. EC,
1. i. c. 10.

Princes and Governors mentioned in the New Testament. 23

* tetrarchy of Philip, intending also to give him the tetrarchy

* of Lysanias.'1

His next preferment was the addition made, by the same
emperor, of the tetrarchy of Galilee, k which has been
mentioned already. The last was what follows : * Claudius1
' by a decree confirmed to Agrippa the dominion, which
4 Caius [Caligula] had given him ; adding also Judea, and

* Samaria, in the utmost extent as possessed by his grand-
' father Herod. This he restored, as due to him by right of

* consanguinity ; and, moreover, added of his own, Abila,

* which had been Lysanias's, together with the country in
4 mount Libanus.'

Josephus therefore confirms the representation which St.
Luke has given of Herod's sovereign power in Judea. This
is worthy of our particular notice, because his three years'
reign in Judea, the last of his life, was the only time, in which
Judea, properly so called, was not a Roman province, from
the banishment of Archelaus, in the sixth or seventh year
of the Christian sera, to the year 66, when they revolted
from the Romans.

St. Luke says, that having " killed James the brother of
John with the sword ; because he saw it pleased the Jews,
he proceeded farther, to take Peter also." That it is very
likely he should be moved by such a consideration as this, is
evident from the character which Josephus has given of
him. Herod the Great, his grandfather, he says, was con-.
tinually obliging foreign states and cities by large bounties,
but did very few things to gratify the Jews : Whereas,
' Agrippa was of a mild and gentle disposition, and good to

* all men ; he was beneficent to strang'ers, but especially
' kind to the Jews his countrymen, and sympathized with
' them in all their troubles. For which reason also he
' lived much at Jerusalem, observed the Jewish institutions,

* practised the purity they require, and did not let a day pass

* without worshipping God according to the law.'m This his

1 Ant. xviii. c. vii. sect. 10. fin. k Vid. Joseph, p. 820. v. 20. p. 1067.
V. 20. ' KAav$io£ de — diaypap,p,a TrpanOti, TTJV re apx»jv AypiTTTra

, rjv o TawQ Trapta^e, Kai di eyKw^iajv ayojv TOV (3a<n\ta' TrpoGOrjKijv
TToieiTai iraaav ri}v viro Hpw^s (3a(n\evQeiaav, 6g i]v TraTnroq avrs,
Kai 2a/tapfiar. Kai TCLVTO, fjiev a>f otytiXofJitva Ty oiKtiorrjTi TS

A(3i\av Be TJJV AvaavL!*, KO.I orroffa tv TQ Ai/3av<£» opa, tK TWV aura
7rpo<T£ri0£t. Ant. 19. c. 5. sect. 1. vid. et de B. lib. ii. cap. 10.

m UpavQ de 6 rpoiroQ Aypnnra, Kai 7rpo£ TTCLVTCLQ TO tvepyeriicov 6p.oioV rotg
rjv 0i\a^0po>7rof, KCLKIIVOIQ ev^eiicvvp,evog TO ^)iXo^W(Oov, roif
uQ xp/jTOf, Kai crv^TraOrjQ /iaXXov* r'ideia ysv avry SiaiTa, Kai
(.v TOIQ IfpocroXyjwoif rjv, Kai ret Trarpta »ca0apa>£ tTrjpei. Sia TTacrrjc, ysv
avTOV rjytv ayveiag, sde rifiepa Tig Trapudevev avTifJ TtjQ vofUfJirjG xj7P£U8cra
Antiq. lib. xix. cap. 7. sect. 3.

24 Credibility of the Gospel History.

zeal for the institutions and customs of the Jews, and his desire
to oblige that people, very much confirm the account St.
Luke gives of his forwardness in persecuting the disciples
of Jesus.

What St. Luke adds concerning this person is a very
extraordinary relation, and Josephus concurs with him in
it. " And he went down from Judea to Ceesarea, and there
abode — And upon a set day, Herod, arrayed in royal apparel,
sat upon his throne, and made an oration to them. And the
people gave a shout, saying, It is the voice of a god and not
of a man. And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him,
because he gave not God the glory ; and he was eaten of
worms and gave up the ghost." Acts xii. 19, 21 — 23.

Josephus's words are these : ' Having now reigned three

* whole years over all Judea, he went to the city Caesarea,

* formerly called Straton's tower. Here11 he celebrated shows
' in honour of Caesar, a festival having been appointed to be

* observed there at this time for his safety. On this occasion
' there was a vast resort of persons of rank and distinction
' from all parts of the country. On the second day of the shows,
' early in the morning*, he came into the theatre, dressed in

a robe of silver, of most curious workmanship. The rays
of the rising sun, reflected from so splendid a g'arb, g*ave
him a majestic and awful appearance. In a short time they
began in several parts of the theatre flattering acclamations,
w^hich proved pernicious to him. They called him a god, and
entreated him to be propitious to them, saying, " Hitherto
we have respected you as a man; but now we acknowledge
you to be more than mortal." The king neither reproved
these persons, nor rejected the impious flattery. Soon after
this, casting his eyes upward, he saw an owl sitting upon a
certain cord over his head. He perceived it to be a mes
senger of evil to him, as it had been before of his prosperity,
and was struck with the deepest concern. Immediately
after this, he was seized with pains in his bowels extremely
violent at the very first. Then turning himself toward his
friends, he spoke to them in this manner: " I, your god, am
required to leave this world ; fate instantly confuting these
false applauses just bestowed upon me : I, who have been
called immortal, am hurried away to death. But God's ap
pointment must be submitted to. Nor has our condition in
this world been despicable ; we have lived in the state
which is accounted happy." While he was speaking these
words, he was oppressed with the increase of his pains. He
was carried therefore with all haste to his palace. These

n A. D. 44.

Princes and Governors mentioned in the New Testament. 25

« pains in his bowels continually tormenting him, he expired
' in five days' time, in the fifty-fourth year of his age,0 arid of
* his reign the seventh. 'P

It is needless to make many reflections here. The reader's
thoughts cannot but carry him to many points of agreement
in these two relations. They agree, that this event happened
at Ccesarea : St. Luke says, it was upon a set day ; Josephus,
that it was upon the second day of the shows celebrated in
honour of the emperor. The magnificence of Herod's dress
is hinted by St. Luke, and particularly described by
Josephus. The flattery is exactly the same in both. But
in two things, above all others, is the harmony of these
accounts observable. First, the temper of mind with which
Herod received this flattery. St. Luke says, " he gave not
God the glory ;" Josephus, ' he neither reproved these per-
' sons, nor rejected the impious flattery :' words that deserve
particular notice in Josephus, because he had at times
represented this Herod Agrippa as an extraordinary
person, and free from the vices of his grandfather Herod;
and indeed has endeavoured to raise his character for lenity
and goodness, beyond what is consistent with some other
accounts. For Dio Cassius says, Agrippa was reckoned

0 TpiTov Se tTog avTq fiamXtvovTi rrjg oXrjg I&daiag TTfTrX/jpwro, KCII Trapqv
tig TroXiv KaKraptiav, rj TrpoTtpov Srparu»vo£ irvpyog ticaXtiTO' avvtrtXti Be ev-
ravQa Sewpiag tig TTJV Kaiaapog Tiprjv, vTrtp Tr)g tKtivs vwTrjoiag topTrjv TIVO.
Tavrrjv tTTirafjitvog. KO.I Trap' avTrjv rj9poi<zo TOJV KO.TO. TIJV t7rap%iav tv TtXti
Kat 7rpol3t[3r]KOT(i)v tig a'£iav TrXrflog, Afwrepa^ fo ratv S'Ewptwv rjnepq <roX/jv
ivdvaafievog t% apyvps TrtTroirj^jLfvrjv Trctffav, MQ Sfavfiaffiov v<j)rjv tivai, TraprjX-
9ev tig TO S'earpoj/ ap^o/j,evrig r/^tpag' tvOa raig Trpwratg TOJV r'jXictKwv CIKTIVIOV
tirifioXaiQ 6 apyupog KCLTavyaaQiiQ Savftaffiajc cnre^iXfit, f^ap^aipajv TI
KO.I roif fig avTOv aTtvi^sm QpiKkjBfg. evOvg Se 01 KoXciKtg rag, ade tKtivy
ayaOs, aXXog aXXoOev QaivciQ avtflowv, Qtov Trpodayoptuovrt^, tvfitvrjg re
fTTiXcyoiref, (i teat jU£^pi vvv <!)£ av9p<t)7rov ttyofifjOrifjiEv, a\\a TBVTe
Tova ff£ SrvrjTrjg Qvatujg o^oXoys^fv. OVK tirtirX^f. TSTOLQ 6 pamXtvg, ade TIJV
KoXaKtiav aotft&aav aTrerpi^aro' avciKv^ag S' uv \LIT oXiyov TOV (3vf3u)va TTJQ
tavTa KetyaXtjc; v7T6pKa9t£op,tvov tidtv tTTi rr^oivm TIVOQ' ayyfXov r£ T&TOV
tvQvQ tvoi]a(.v KCIKUJV eivai, TOV KO.I TTOTC rwv ayaQuv ytvoptvov, Kai dtctKap-
Siov eaxtv odvvrjv' aOpsv Se avT^t Ttjg KoiXiag irpoattyvatv aXyrifia,
a^odpoTTjTOg apZapevov. Ava9eojp(uv av Trpog TUQ 0tX«e, 6 Qeog vpiv f
Qrjcriv, ijdij KaraTpg^stv £7rirarro/iai TOV (3iov, 7rapa%pj//^a TI\Q tip.apfjif.vrjQ
apji jus KaTt-^fvfffjitvag Quvag tXtyxsffrjg. Kai o icX^9tig aQavaroc, v<p v
rjSr) Sravuv aTrayo^ai' dtKTfov $t TTJV 7rs7rpa)p.evt]v, 7j Qtog (3tf3sXt]TaC /cat yap
ftt(3ut)KafifV tida^r] QavXug, aXX' ITTI Trig [AaKapiZofifvrjg Xa/iTrpor/jrog. Tawra
\iy<i)v tiriTaati rrjg oSvvrjg KaTtirovtiTO' /jitTa <nraciig sv tig TO fiaviXeiov

tKOfii<j9r] avvtxwg fit tfi rjfjitpag TrtvTt T<p Ttjg ya<=rpog aXyj^^art CifpyavOtig

TOV piov KaTt^pt-^tVt ctTro ytvtvtwg ayu)v TrtvTtKo^ov trog Kai TtrapTOV, Trjg
(3a<riXtiag dt tftoo/jiov. Antiq. lib. xix. c. 8. sect. 2.

p NOTE. The seventh year of his reign is computed from the time of his
Hist advancement, by Caligula, to the tetrarchy of his uncle Philip,
A. D. 37.

26 Credibility of the Gospel History.

one of Caligula's advisers in his cruel and tyrannical mea
sures. i

Another thing, in which this harmony is very considerable,
is that according to St. Luke, " immediately the angel of
the Lord smote him :" and Josephus assures us, that these
pains seized him in the theatre, before all the assembly, and
that he apprehended a fatal necessity of speedily leaving
this world. And when Josephus says, * these flattering
4 acclamations proved pernicious to Agrippa,' he plainly
intimates, that his death was supposed to be a punishment for
the approbation with which he received them.

Though St. Luke only had related this event, and there
had been no account of it extant in Josephus, or any other
ancient writer, yet I should not have doubted the truth of
it. St. Luke would not otherwise have dared to relate an
affair so disadvantageous, as this is in many respects, to so
considerable a person as Herod ; who was very acceptable to
the Jewish people, and had received many honours and
civilities from two successive Roman emperors, Caligula and
Claudius. Nor would any man of tolerable capacity, much
less so sensible a person as St Luke appears to be by his
writings, have exposed his credit, by placing such an event
in so public and noted a place as Csesarea, the person
concerned being seated on a throne, surrounded by attendance
suitable to the occasion of a particular solemnity, if he had
not been sure of the fact. And yet it may be said to receive a
farther confirmation from Josephus, who, we may be assured,
out of regard to his own credit, and his favourable inclination
to AgTippa, would never invent such a story as this.

As for the owl which Josephus speaks of, and which is
now said to be a ' Messenger of evil to Agrippa, as it had
* been before of his prosperity ;' it has reference to an ac
count he has given of the perching of such a bird upon a
tree near the same Agrippa, when he was put into chains
by order of Tiberius ; and to a prognostication, which a
German astrologer is said to have delivered at that time
concerning him/ Whether such a bird did now appear in
the theatre or not, I will not determine, nor do I think it
material. Josephus does now and then throw a circum
stance or two into his relations that give them an heathenish
air ; with a design, it is probable, of rendering his history

Ov /JitvToi ravO1 OVT<O£ O.VT&Q e\V7Tti, cog TO TrpoG$OKav fm 7r\eiov rr]v re
TIJV TS Tain KO.I TTJV a.GE\-ytiav avfyauv' icai juaXtcr0' on rjTrvvQavovTo
TOV re AypiTTTrav avry KO.I TOV Avrio%ov, TSQ flaaiXtaQ, axTTTtp TIVCIQ rupav-
vodidaffKaXxG, avvtivai. Dio. lib. lix. p. 658. r Jos. Antiq. 1. 18

cap. vii. sect. 7.

Princes and Governors mentioned in the New Testament. 27

more agreeable to the Greeks and Romans, for whom it was
principally intended. But it is evident, from his account,
that Herod was seized with a very uncommon disorder, and
that he had the most lively apprehensions of his approach
ing" death.

St. Luke says, " Herod was eaten of worms." This is
not mentioned by Josephus. And this has been supposed
by some to be a considerable objection against St. Luke's
account ; but in my opinion without any good reason. For
the distemper, of which Herod Agrippa died, was, accord
ing to Josephus's own description of it, very like to that of
Herod his grandfather ; who, beside other disorders, was
afflicted with violent pains in his bowels, and an ulcer which
bred worms.8 And it is not at all unlikely that Agrippa's case
was, in this last respect also, very much the same with that
of Herod the Great. I should think, that most persons must
be ashamed to represent the omission of this particular
in Josephus, as an objection of any moment. The distempers
of great men are seldom particularly described. A certain
delicacy often restrains men from making mention of such
matters, and especially are historians shy of relating them
concerning those princes, in whose honour they are interested.
Upon the whole, I believe this passage of Josephus will be
allowed to be a very remarkable attestation of this extraordi
nary event related by St. Luke.

It will be of use to put down here from Josephus the

names of Herod Agrippa's children. * Thus died king

* Agrippa, leaving behind him one son named Agrippa, then

seventeen years of age, and three daughters ; Bernice, who

was married to Herod her father's brother, being sixteen

years of age, Mariamne, and Drusilla, who were unmarried.

The former was ten years old, and Drusilla six. — Drusilla

was contracted to Epiphanes, son of Antiochus king of

Cornmagene.n

VII. From the xxiiid and two following chapters of the
Acts of the Apostles, we learn that Felix was governor in
Judea, and that Porcius Festus succeeded him ; the truth of
which is particularly attested by Josephus,11 in divers parts
of his history.

VIII. Concerning Felix, St. Luke has mentioned divers
things, beside his being governor, that will deserve our
consideration. Whilst St. Paul was at Crcsarea, St. Luke
says : " and after certain days, when Felix came with his
wife Drusilla, which was a Jewess, he sent for Paul, and

s Ant. lib. xvii. cap. vi. sect. 5. * Ibid. lib. xix. c. 9. in. u Ibid. xx.
cap. vi. vii. De B. J. lib. 2. c. 12. sect. 8. c. 13, 14.

28 Credibility of the Gospel History.

heard him concerning the faith in Christ," Acts xxiv. 24.
This Drusilla is the youngest daughter of Herod Agrippa,
as was shown just now. We have this account in Josephus,
of her marriage writh Felix.

* Agrippa having received this present from Csesar, [viz.
' Claudius,] gave his sister Drusilla in marriagev to Azizus,
' king of the Emesenes, when he had consented to be cir-
' cumcised.w For Epiphanes, the son of king Antiochus,

* had broke the contract with her, by refusing to embrace
' the Jewish customs, although he had promised her father
' he would. — But this marriage of Drusilla with Azizus was
' dissolved, in a short time, after this manner. When Felix
' was procurator of Judea, having had a sight of her, he

* was mightily taken with her ; and indeed she was the most

* beautiful of her sex. He therefore sent to her Simon, a Jew
' of Cyprus, who was one of his friends, and pretended to
6 magic ; by whom he persuaded her to leave her husband,

* and marry him ; promising to make her perfectly happy,
6 if she did not disdain him. It was far from being a sufficient

* reason ; but to avoid the envy of her sister Bernice, who

* was continually doing her ill offices, because of her beauty,
' she was induced to transgress the laws of her country and
4 marry Felix.'

It has been thought indeed by some, that Tacitus gives a
different account of this Drusilla, when he says, that Felix
had for his wife Drusilla, grand-daughter of Cleopatra and
Antony .x But I don't know that I am obliged to take notice
of this, since Josephus agrees with St. Luke, " that she was
a Jewess." And he may be justly supposed to be as well
acquainted with Drusilla's original as Tacitus. I shall only
observe, that Suetonius says, that Felix married three queens,y

v This was done A. D. 52, or 53. w Aa/3wv fo TJJV dwptav -rrapa

rs Kaiaapof AyptTTTrae, ticCiidajffi Trpoc ya/zov A£i£y TQ Efjieffwv jSacriXti, Trepi-
SrtXijvavTi, ApsaiXXav TTJV adeXtyrjv. ~E7ri<j)avr]£ yap 6 Avrto%8 TH
Traig TrapyTrjaciTO rov yafjiov, prj fiaXijOtiG «£ ra Isdauov tOr] ptTa-

fcaiTrep THTO TTOitjvtir' TrpovTrocrxoftevog avrijQ T<p Trarpi AiaXvovrai

Se Ty ApaaiXXy Trpog TOV AZ,i£oi> 01 ya/iot, HIT a TroXw xpo
tf.i7retT8(Tr)g airiag. Ka0' bv /caipov Ttjg IsSaiag fTTtrpOTrfvo'e 4>^Xi
Tavrrjv, Kat yap t}v KaXXd Tracruv diaQfpmTa, Xapfiavfi Tr]£ yvvaiKOQ
p.iav, Kat "SifJLWva ovofiari, TUV eavrs ^)iXa>v, Isdaiov, KvTrpiov Be yf VOQ, jiayov
fivai aKrjTTTOfJitvov, TTt/iTrwv Trpog a.VTr}V, errfiOf TOV aW^pa KaTaXnr&aav a.VT(p
y?/jLta(T0ai, fiaKapiav Troirjaeiv £7rayyeXXofAtvoQ, [ir] VTreprjtyavrjffavav O.VTOV. H
^£ KCIKOJG TrpccTT&ffa, Kai Qvyt.iv TOV f/c Tr]£ adtXQrjQ BtpviKT/g (3sXop,tvrj <j)9ovov,
Sia jap TO KoXXog Trap1 eictivrjg tv «KT oXtyoig tjSXaTrrtro, 7rapa(3rjvai Tare
TTUTpia vomfia 7T£i0£rai, icai r^> <br)XiKi yrjfjia^Oai. Antiq. lib. XX. c. 6. sect.

1, 2. x Dmsilla Cleopatrae et Antonii nepte in matrimonium ac-

cepta : ut ejusdem Antonii Felix progener, Claudius nepos esset. Hist. lib. v.
cap. 9. y Felicem, quern — provinciaeque Judaeae prseposuit, trium re-

ginarum maritum. Suet. Claud, cap. 28.

Princes and Governors mentioned in the New Testament. 29

or three women of royal families. It is certain that Drusilla,
a Jewess, sister of Agrippa the younger, was one of them.
And if Tacitus was not mistaken, another of them was de
scended from Cleopatra, the queen of Egypt, and Antony,
and was called Drusilla.2 Who the third was, doth not ap
pear that I know of.

Tacitus says, that whilst Felix was procurator of Judea,

* he acted in a very arbitrary manner, and scrupled no kind
4 of injustice.' a Josephus has recorded one instance of
abominable villany he was guilty of. * Jonathan the high-
' priest often admonished Felix to correct his administration ;

* for that otherwise he himself was in danger of the ill-will

* of the people, since he had desired the emperor to make
' him procurator of Judea.' But he not being able to bear
these frequent remonstrances, < by a large sum of money cor-
4 rupted an intimate friend of Jonathan's, who got him to be
' assassinated.'5 His government was so irregular, that the
Jews followed him with complaints to Rome after he had left
the province ; and it was owing to a very powerful interest
made for him at court, that he escaped the resentment of
Nero.

All these above-mentioned particulars from Josephus and
Tacitus, may satisfy us, that when, Acts xxiv. 25, " Paul
reasoned of righteousness, temperance, [or chastity,] and
judgment to come," his subjects were wen chosen with re
spect to both his hearers ; and that what St. Luke adds
concerning Felix, that he, ver. 26, " hoped that money
should have been given him of Paul,c that he might loose
him, " is no calumny.

Some, indeed, may think it strange, that Felix should
have had any hopes of receiving money from this prisoner,
when it does not appear he had any estate ; and he has inti
mated, that he was at times obliged to " labour, working with

z She is supposed by some learned men to be the daughter of Juba, king of
Mauritania, by Cleopatra, daughter of M. Antony and Cleopatra ; and to have
died before Felix came into Judea. Vid. Joseph, p. 891. not. 6. et notas in
Sueton. Claud, c. 28. a E quibus Antonius Felix, per omnem seevitiam

ac libidinem, jus regium servili ingenio exercuit. Tacit. Hist. lib. v. c. 9. At
non frater ejus cognomento Felix pari moderatione agebat, jam pridem Judaeae
impositus, et cuncta malefacta sibi impune ratus, tanta potentia subnixo.
Ann. lib. xii. c. 54. b E^wv fo aifrxQuQ TTOOQ TOV apxieoea TOV IuvaQi]v 6
<&/7\i£, Sta to TTO\\aKiQ VTT avr& vaOertiGOai, TTIOL TH KQUTOVWG Trpoi^acr&ai TWV
Kara rr]v Isdatav Trpay^arwv, fir} Kai ^t/i^ti/ avrog otyXoirj irapa TOIQ TrXrjOtffiv,
oz eKfivov Trapa TS Kattrapog Tre/jityOrjvai, rr}Q Isdatag S.TTITQOITOV,
ai 8rj dia Toiavrrjg ainaq 6 3>jj\i£ TOV Tri^orarov TWV IdtvaOs 0iXwv, —

Oft, TroXXa xpT/jtzara dwcrfi vTricrxv&fJievoQ, K, r. X. Ant. 20. c. 7. sect. 5.

c Scelus est accipere ab reo : quanto magis ab accusatore ? quanto etiam
sceleratius ab utroque ? Cicer. in Verr. lib. ii. n. 78.

30 Credibility of the Gospel History.

his hands" for a subsistence, 1 Cor. iv. 12. Acts xx. 34.
But in answer to this, it has been observed by expositors,
that Paul had told Felix, that " after many years" " he came
to bring- alms to his nation and offering's," Acts xxiv. 17.
It is likely, therefore, that Felix imagined that the money
had not been all distributed as yet, since Paul was appre
hended within a few days after his coming to Jerusalem, ch.
xxi. 27. xxiv. 11 ; or, at least, concluded he must needs be
a person of some consequence, and have good friends.

IX. St. Luke says, Acts xxv. 13, " And after certain days,
king Agrippa and Bernice came to Csesarea to salute Festus."
This Agrippa is the son of Herod Agrippa above mentioned.
St. Luke calls him king, as Josephus also does very often.d
But St. Luke does not suppose him to be king of Judea ;
for all the judicial proceedings in that country, relating to
Paul, are transacted before Felix, and this Festus his succes
sor. Besides, he says here, that " Agrippa came to Ceesarea
to salute Festus ;" that is, to pay his respects to him, and
compliment him upon his arrival in the province. See
Acts xxv. 1.

When his father was dead, Claudius intended at first to
have put him immediately in possession of his father's do
minions ; but Agrippa being then but seventeen years of age,
the emperor was persuaded to alter his mind, ' and appointed

* Cuspius Fadus prefect of Judea, and the whole kingdom.'6
Which Fadus was succeeded by Tiberius Alexander,
Cumanus, Felix, Festus ;f though these did not possess the
province in the same extent that Fadus did.

Agrippa therefore was disappointed of his father's king
dom ; but he had by this time got considerable territories.

« Herod, brother of king Agrippa the great, died in the
' eighth year of the reign of Claudius Caesar. — Claudius

* then gave his government to Agrippa the younger.' s This
is our Agrippa we^are now speaking of.

' The twelfth year of his reign being completed, he
6 [Claudius] gave Agrippa the tetrarchy of Philip, and

* Batanea, adding also Trachonitis with Abila. This had

* been the tetrarchy of Lysanias. But he took away from
1 him Chalcis, after he had governed it four years.' h This
from his Antiquities. In the war of the Jews, Josephus
expresseth it thus : ' After this he sent Felix the brother of
' Pallas to be procurator of Judea, Galilee, Samaria, and
' Peroea ; and promoted Agrippa from Chalcis to a greater

d Ant. xx. 1. viii. sect. 6. et. passim. e Ant. xix. c. ix. fin.

f Ant. xx. deBell. lib. ii. « Jos. Ant. xx. p. 887. in. h Ibid. p.

890. v. 25, &c.

Princes and Governors mentioned in the New Testament. 31

« kingdom, giving to him the tetrarchy which had been

* Philip's. (This is Batanea and Trachonitis, and Gaulanitis.)
' And he added moreover the kingdom of Lysanias, and the
' province that had been Varus's.' *

* Nero, in the first year of his reign, gave Agrippa a certain
' part of Galilee, ordering Tiberias and Taricheas to be

* subject to him. He gave him also Julias a city of Persea,

* and fourteen towns in the neighbourhood of it.'k St. Luke
therefore is in the right in giving Agrippa the title of king*
at this time.

The reader has, doubtless, observed, that when Paul was
before Agrippa, he addressed himself to him as a Jew. Acts
xxvi. 2, 3. " I think myself happy, king Agrippa, because
I shall answer for myself this day before thee. — Especially
because I know thee to be expert in all customs and questions
which are among the Jews. Ver. 27. King Agrippa,
believest thou the prophets ? I know that thou believest."

From what hath been alleged, relating to Herod Agrippa,
it is plain he was a zealous Jew, or at least appeared so at
Jerusalem, and had educated all his children in the Jewish
religion. This Agrippa, his son, undoubtedly maintained the
same profession : and now he had, by the permission of the
emperor, the direction of the sacred treasury, the government
of the temple, and the right of nominating the high priests.1
No wonder, therefore, that St. Paul told Agrippa, " he knew
him to be expert in all customs and questions which were
among the Jews."

1 De B. lib. ii. c. xii. fin. k Ant. xx. c. vii. sect. 4.

1 Josephus indeed says, Antiq. 1. xx. c. 1 . sect. 3. that Herod [King of
Chalcis, brother of Agrippa the Great] did, upon the death of his brother,
request of Claudius Csesar the power of the temple and of the sacred money,
and the right of nominating the high priest, and that he obtained all these
privileges : and that from him this power continued to all his descendants, till
the end of the war. Hr^traro tie /cat Hpwfojf, 6 adtXtyog ptv AypiTTTra TS

TfTtXeVTrjKOTOQ, XaX/Cl^Of $£ Tf]V CtpfflV KttTtt TOV XpOVOV fKtlVOV TrtTri^tVfJLtVO^

KXavdiov KctKTapa rrjv t%sffiav TS vtw, KO.I TWV upwr ^pTj/iarwv, /cai rijv TWV

TravTwv re tTrtru^tv* t fKEtvs re Tract TOIQ
avrs Trapeptivtv rj t%s<ria ju£%pi TTJQ TS TroXeps TI\IVTT]Q. But either there is
some error here in the copies of Josephus, or else we do not understand him
right. For none of the sons of Herod of Chalcis did nominate any high
priests. But according to Josephus's own account, all the changes in the
priesthood, after the death of the said Herod, [which happened in the 8th
of Claudius,] to the time of the war, were made by Agrippa the younger,
nephew of this Herod, king of Chalcis. See Ant. xx. c. vii. sect. 11. c. viii.
sect. 1. And when the people of Jerusalem had a mind to apply the sacred
money to any particular purpose, they addressed to Agrippa ; and he gave
the directions. Ibid. sect. 7. And Josephus says expressly, that the king
[Agrippa] had been entrusted with the care or government of the temple, by
Claudius Caesar. O fiamXevg £e, cTTfTriTcvro yap VTTO KXavdts Ka«rapO£ TTJV
TS ttpa, K. X. ibid.

32 Credibility of the Gospel History.

X. Bernice was a lady well known in those times. There
are several reflections made upon her conduct by Josephus,m
as well as other writers.11 But as St. Luke says nothing of
her, beside her making- a visit to Festus with Agrippa ; and it
has been shown already who she was, namely, the daughter
of Herod Agrippa, and the sister of Agrippa the younger, I
am not bound to add any farther concerning her. I shall only
say, the respect which Titus Vespasian showed her, gave
occasion for much discourse ; and that she had once hopes
of being empress, but the murmurs of the people of Rome
prevented it.0

XI. There are but two things more I shall take notice of
in this chapter. They may be judged by some, too minute
to be insisted on ; but they appear to me instances of great
exactness and propriety, and to afford a strong proof, that
St. Luke was perfectly well acquainted with the matters of
which he wrote.

Paul and Barnabas, having preached the word of God at
Salamis [in Cyprus] went through " the isle to Paphos,
where they found Barjesus, which was with the Deputy of
the country, Sergius Paulus ;" Acts xiii. 7. But in the
Greek it is, with the Proconsul Sergius Paulus.P

It is well known to the learned, that upon Augustus's
becoming absolute master of the Roman commonwealth, there
was a division made of the provinces of the empire ;i the
most powerful, or at least, those which required the greatest
number of troops, the emperor kept to himself, the rest were
made over to the people and senate. The officers sent by the
emperor were called lieutenants, or propraetors, though they
were consular persons ; that is, though they had served the
consulship in the city.r The governors sent by the senate, into
the provinces that belonged to their share, he appointed to be
called proconsuls, a name more suitable to the peaceful state,
which the provinces allotted to the senate were in. But the

m Ant. lib. xx. c. vi. sect. 3. n Tacit. Hist. 1. ii. c. 2. et 81. Juv.

Sat. G. v. 155. ° Btpcvucj; St Kr^vpwf TS. rivOet, KCU dia TSTO KO.I eg

rr\v Pwfirjv pera TS aSe\(f>& TS AyptTTTra qXOt rj de tv ry iraXant^ w/ceo-f,

KO.I T(p TiTff) Gvvf.yiyvf.ro. TIpoffedoKaro 8t ya^OrjfftffOai avrtp, /cat travra t)dr]
wf KO.I yvvr) avrs «<ra CTTOIEI' a><r' eictivov dvaxtpaivovTag TSQ Pa^aisc f TTI T&-
TOLQ ycfOrj^evovt aTroirtn^aoQai avrrjv. Dio ex Xiphil. lib. 66. p. 752. Nee
minus libido, [suspecta in eo erat,~] — propterque insignem reginse Berenices
araorem, cui etiam nuptias pollicitus ferebatur — prsecipueque sumtam sibi
Berenicen statim ab urbe dimisit invitus invitam. Suet, in Tit. c. 7.

p Of rjv ovv rq) avQvTrar^ 2fpyt^> UavX^. q Strabon. Geog. lib. 3.

p. 166. Ed. Amst. 1707. et lib. xvii. fin. Suet. August, c. 47, 48. Dio. lib.
53. p. 503. r T«£ re (.TIQUQ VTTO re tavTS atpeto-^ai, KCU 7rpf<r/3£vraf avrtt

avri<?parr)ynQ re. ovofj,a%£G9ai, icqv e/c rwv vTrartvKOTOiv wcrt, disrate. Dio. lib.
53. p. 504. D.

Princes and Governors mentioned in the New Testament. 33

division made at this time5 underwent many changes. And
a province, assigned at first to the senate, was afterwards
made over to the emperor, and on the contrary. Such a
change happened with reference to this province of Cyprus ;
which, in the first partition, was one of the emperor's provin
ces, but was afterwards together with Gallia Narbonensis,
given to the senate ; in the room of which he took Dalmatia,
which at first was theirs.1 In this state the province continued,
and the proper title of the governor of Cyprus was that of
proconsul.

It is true, Strabo says, Cyprus was a praetorian pro
vince;11 and this has made this text a mighty difficulty
with many learned men. Beza went so far into the opinion
of the impropriety of this expression, as to attempt to correct
it, in his translation of this text, and he put propraetor in
the room of proconsul. And the solutions, which have been
offered by divers other learned men,v have, I believe,
appeared unsatisfactory. But if Dio's whole account of this
matter had been attended to, the difficulty had vanished. w
Cyprus was undoubtedly a praetorian province, as all the
people's provinces were, except two. But the governors of
all their provinces had the title of proconsul. ' It was de
creed, that two of their provinces, Asia and Africa, should be
appropriated to senators that had been consuls : and all the
rest were given to those which had been praetors.'x ' But
that they should be all called proconsuls, not only those
which had been consuls, but those also which had been only
praetors.'y And Suetonius says, ' That Augustus took the
most powerful provinces to himself, and gave the rest to
proconsuls chosen by the senate.'2

Examples also support this use of the word. Crete was a
praetorian province, according to Strabo and Dio; yet Tacitus
calls Caesius Cordus, proconsul of Crete. a There is also an

| A. U. 727. before Christ, 27. vid. Basnage annal. Polit. Eccl.

KvTrpog, /cat AiyvTrrioi ev ry TH Kataapog /iepifo. TOTE eyivovro'

vrepoi/ yap TTJV fj.ev KVTTQOV Kai TTJV TaXartav rr\v Trtpi Nap/3wva ry C>;/ia>
airtSuKiv, K. T. \. Dio. ibid. p. 504. A. TO re & av /cat rrjv Kvirpov Kai rrjv

TaXanav rr\v Nap/Swvj/atav aTrecWe ry fofjuy /ecu ovrw£, avOvTraroi /cat

t£ e/cava TO. f-Qvrj 7re/z7r£<T0ai tjpZavTo. id. lib. 54. ad A. U. 732. p. 523. B.

E£ tKtivs 8' eytvtTo CTrap^ta rj vtjaos, KaQairtp xai vvv e«ri, TpanjytKT/.
lib. 14. sub fin. v Baron. A. Chr. 46. n. xi. Grot, in loc. &c.

w Vid. Noris. Cenotaph. Pisan. p. 219. x Ty & &j /3«\y, tcta \iiv

Toig Te vTraTtVKoat rrjv re A.<j>piicr]V Kai TTJV Aaiav, /cat roig e<rparj?y?j/cocri ra
XoiTra iravTa aTrei/e^e. Dio. p. 505. C. y Kai avQviraT^ KaXuoOai

HT/I ore TBQ vTrarev/corac;, a\\a Kai T8£ aXXec;, TUV t<rpar^y7j/corwv, r) SOKUVTOJV
yap e<rpari}yi}iccvac, povov OVTO.Q. id. p. 504. C. z Provincias validiores

ipse suscepit — caeteras proconsulibus sortito permisit. August, cap. 47.

a Ancharius Priscus Caesium Cordum proconsulem Cretee postulaverat repe-

VOL. I. D

34 Credibility of the Gospel History.

ancient inscription of Caligula's reign, in which Aquius
Scaura is called proconsul of Cyprus. b If I have done St.
Luke justice in this place, it is chiefly owing to assistances
borrowed from Cardinal Noris : and 1 think myself obliged
to make a particular acknowledgment of it.

XII. The last thing I shall take notice of, is the title
given to GALLIC ;c who in our translation is called the
deputy, but in the Greek, proconsul d of Achaia. In this
instance, St. Luke's accuracy appears more conspicuous
than in the former, because this province had a more various
fortune than the other. In the original partition, they were
assigned to the people and senate.6 In the reign of Tiberius
they were, at their own request, made over to the -emperor.*
In the reign of Claudius, when L. Quinctius Crispinus and
M. Statilius Taurus were consuls, A. U. 797. A. D. 44.
they were again restored to the senate.^ And therefore ' from
* that time Fas Dio says upon Augustus's giving Cyprus to
' the senate] proconsuls were sent into this country.' St.
Paul was brought before Gallio in the year of our Lord
52, h orSS;1 consequently Gallio was proconsul of Achaia,
as St. Luke calls him.

And perhaps it will not be amiss to observe, that after
wards Nero made the Achaians a free people. k The senate
therefore lost this province again. However, that they
might not be sufferers, Nero gave them the island of Sardinia
in the room of it.1 Vespasian made Achaia a province again."1

There is likewise a peculiar propriety in the name of the
province of which Gallio was proconsul. The country subject
to him was all Greece ; but the proper name of the province
among the Romans was Achaia. This is evident from some
passages already set down in the margin, and has been
particularly observed by Pausanias."

tundis. Ad A. U. 774. Ann. 1. iii. cap. 38. b P. Aquius Scaura —

C. C^SARE PRO CONSULE CYPRUM OBTINUIT. Gruter. Inscript.
pag. 360. 3. laudat. a Noris. Cenotaph. Pisan. Dissert, ii. p. 219.

c Of Gallio see more, Ch. viii. sect. 1. d ArBvirartvovroQ ri\q A%aiaf.

e Dio. p. 503. fin. f Achaiam ac Macedonian!, onera deprecantes,

levari in praesens proconsular! imperio, tradique Caesari placuit. Tacit. An.
lib. 1. cap. 76. g Provincias Achaiam et Macedonian!, quas Tiberius

ad curam suam transtulerat, senatui reddidit. Sueton. in Glaud. cap. 25. Tqv
re A.%atav Kai rr\v Maictdoviav — airtSuKiv 6 KXavdioc; TOTC rip fcX?;py. Dio.
lib. 60. p. 680. E. h Basnage Ann. P. E. i Pearson. Ann.

Paul. k Universae Achaiae libertatem Domitius Nero dedit. Plin. Hist.

Nat. lib. 4. cap. .6. ! Kat (XevOepov 6 Ntpwi/ afyirimv cnravriov, aXXayjjv

Crj^iov TroiriGa^tvoQ ruv Pwjwaiwv* Sap&u yap ri\v VTJCTOV eg ret jua\i<ra
fjLova avn E\\a^o£ atyimv avrtSwKEv. Pausan. p. 428. Hanov. 1613.
Achaiam — libertate adempta, in provincianim formam redegit. Sueton.
in Vespas. c. 8. n KaXstri de «^ EXXa^og, aXX' A^atag »}yc^ova ot

The State of the Jews in Judea. 35

CHAP. II.

OF THE STATE OF THE JEWS IN JUDEA, DURING THE
MINISTRY OF OUR SAVIOUR AND HIS APOSTLES.

J. The religious state of the Jews, according to the writers
of the New Testament. II. According to other ancient
writers. III. The method of considering their civil state,
in four periods, proposed. IV. Three preliminary ob-
servations. V. Their civil state, in the first period, ac
cording to the writers of the New Testament. VI. Some
difficulties relating to it considered. VII. Their state, in
the second period, according to the same writers. VIII.
In the third. IX. In the fourth period. X. Some
difficulties relating to this last period. XI. The civil
state of Judea, in the first and last periods, according to
other ancient writers. XII. In the second. XIII. In the
third period. XIV. The chief captain at Jerusalem.
XV. The captain of the temple. XVI. jFestus's council.

IN considering the state of the Jews in their own country,
two things are to be regarded, their religious and their civil
state.

I. That they had, according to the sacred writers, the
free exercise of their religion, is evident from the whole tenor
of the history contained in the gospels and the Acts of the
Apostles. They had their synagogues, the law and the
prophets were read there ; our Saviour taught in the
synagogues. Whenever he healed any lepers, he " bid
them go and shew themselves to the priests," Matt. viii. 4.
" and offer the gift that Moses commanded," Luke v. 14.

There appears to have been a great resort to the temple
at Jerusalem, from Galilee, and other parts, at all their
usual great feasts. They were at full liberty to make what
contributions they saw fit to their sacred treasury ; Mark
xii. 41, 44, Luke xxi. 1 ; arid so secure were they, that they
used indirect practices to enrich it ; Matt. xv. 5, Mark vii.
11, 12. There is no mention made in the history of our
Saviour's ministry, of any restraint, or obstruction they met
with in their worship, save that one of the " Galileans,
whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices,"
Luke xiii. 1.

II. That they might thus freely perform all the services of

Pw^cuoi, dioTi extipuaavTo EXX/jvag Si A%aiwv, Tore ra
Pausan. Descript. lib. vii. p. 563.
D2

36 Credibility of the Gospel History.

their religion, though they be supposed to have been then
under the Roman government, is not at all improbable.
For the Romans had ever permitted the people they con
quered to practise their own religious rites in their own
way : and seem not to have departed from this principle, till
after the period of the evangelical history. And that the
Jews were now at full liberty to worship God, according to
the institutions of Moses, we are assured by Josephus, who
has left us the history of these times. The Roman presidents
did indeed, for some time, put in, and turn out their high
priests at pleasure. Valerius Gratus, Pilate's predecessor,
made several high priests, in the time of his government.1
The last high priest he made was Caiaphas, who continued
in that office during all Pilate's administration. He being
removed from the province, Vitellius, president of Syria, put
in Jonathan the son of Ananus, or Annas ;b and afterward
Theophilus, another son of Ananus, in the room of Jonathan.0
But in this there was nothing unusual or extraordinary.
Herod the Great and Archelaus had been wont, before this,
to constitute and remove the high priests at pleasure.*1
Theophilus, just now mentioned, continued high priest till
Herod Agrippa, [mentioned Acts xii.] then king of all Judea,
displaced him, and put Simon the son of Boethus into his
room.6 However, this Herod was a Jew ; and from thence
to the time the war broke out with the Romans, the nomi
nation of the high priests, and the government of the temple,
were committed to princes of the Jewish religion, by the
direction of the Roman emperors. After the death of Herod
Agrippa, Claudius invested Herod king of Chalcis, brother
of Herod Agrippa, with these powers ;f and after his death,
Agrippa the younger, son of the said Herod Agrippa.^ And
although they might all act somewhat arbitrarily in the
nomination of the high priests, yet they always confined
their choice to those who were of the race of the priests.

The Roman governors did indeed sometimes offer them
abuses, or suffer abuses to be committed in the country,
contrary to the institutions of the law, as they did also injure
them in their civil properties. But these abuses seem not
to have been very numerous ; when any were committed, it
was without the emperor's authority ; and, usually, the Jews
at length obtained satisfaction.11

This general view of the religious state of the Jews in

a Ant. 1. xviii. c. 2. b Ibid. cap. v. sect. 3. c Cap. vi. sect. 3.

d Ant. 1. xx. cap. ix. fin. e Lib. xix. c. vi. sect. 2. f Ant. xx.

cap. i. sect. 3. « Ibid. p. 899. 1 10. h Vid. Joseph. Antiq.

xx. c. iv. sect. 3, 4.

The State of the Jews in Judea. 37

Judea may suffice at present. I shall have occasion to
enlarge more upon this subject hereafter.

III. Their civil state will require a more particular
consideration in this place. It will be needful to lay
together a good number of texts, that the reader may be able
to judge what representation the sacred historians have given
of this matter. That it may be done distinctly, I desire
leave to divide their history into four periods. These will
serve to relieve us in a disquisition, which will be of some
length. And perhaps we may have some other advantages,
and receive some clearer light into this matter, by this
method, than we should have otherwise.

1. The first period reaches from the preaching of John
Baptist to our Saviour's resurrection.

2. The second, from thence to the time of Herod the king,
mentioned Acts xii.

3. The reign of this Herod.

4. From the end of his reign to the conclusion of the
evangelical history.

IV. I must here premise, that in going over the several
passages of scripture relating to this matter, we are par
ticularly to. have our eye to a point, in which learned men
are not entirely agreed, namely, what power and authority
the Jewish nation was now possessed of; and whether they
had the power of life and death, or only a right to inflict
some lesser penalties.

2. I would likewise observe, that our inquiry here will
chiefly be confined to the state of the Jews in Judea, properly
so called. I have already shown (in part at least) in the
foregoing- chapter, that St. Luke has given a just account of
the several divisions of the land of Israel, and of the
princes and governors to whom they belonged : but now we
are to consider the power, which the Jews were possessed of
in Judea. Therefore the beheading of John the Baptist is a
fact, that does not at present come particularly under our
consideration. He was beheaded by Herod, tetrarch of
Galilee, son of Herod the Great. And there can be no
doubt, but he had the power of life and death (however he
abused it) in his own territories.

3. I would also premise, that the evangelists are not
answerable for the legality of all the facts they have related.
It is said that, " all they in the synagogue, when they heard
these things, were filled with wrath, and rose up and thrust
him [Jesus] out of the city, [Nazareth,] and led him unto the
brow of the hill whereon their city was built, that they
might cast him down headlong," Luke iv. 28, 29.

38 Credibility of the Gospel History.

The Jews are said to have taken up stones to cast at Jesus
more than once, and that in the temple. John viii. 59, x. 31,
33, 39. It is also said, that when Paul was about to sail into
Syria, from Greece, the Jews laid wait for him, Acts xx. 3.
So that he was forced to alter his purpose, and go another
way. It can never be supposed, that any of these attempts
were legal. It cannot be thought, that Herod the tetrarch,
in whose territories Nazareth was, permitted the multitude to
throw men off the precipice, whenever they did not like their
doctrine. Much less can it be supposed, that such practices
were allowed in any places where the government was in
the hands of the Romans, as it certainly was in Greece, if
not also in Judea. Such practices as these are never coun
tenanced by those who are in authority. And if the scribes
and pharisees, and the great men among the Jews, had, at
this time, any principles that justified and encouraged such
actions ; and if they excited the common people to them in
Judea, as well as in other parts ; it may be reckoned an
argument, they had not the government in their own hands,
or the power of putting men to death by their own authority,
when they judged them guilty. This observation may be
of some use hereafter.

V. I shall now proceed to consider the account we meet
with in the Evangelists in the first period, from the com
mencement of John the Baptist's ministry to the resurrection
of our Saviour.

St. Luke has informed us, that when the word of God
came to John, " in the fifteenth year of Tiberius, Pontius
Pilate was governor of Judea, and Annas and Caiaphas were
high priests," Luke iii. 1, 2. And all the evangelists have
assured us, that our Saviour was brought before Pilate and
condemned by him. So that (according to them) Pilate was
governor in Judea, during the whole time of our Saviour's
ministry, or the period we are now in. But because the
power of this governor is not particularly described by any
of the evangelists, in order to judge what authority he had
here, and what power Annas, or Caiaphas, or any other chief
men among the Jews were possessed of in this country, we
must observe the discourses, proceedings, and events re
corded by the sacred historians, which have any relation to
this matter.

1. The Jews appear to have been at liberty to follow their
own laws and customs in most matters, particularly in the
affair of marriage and divorce, in which they differed con
siderably from many other people.

" It has been said, whosoever shall put away his wife, let

The State of the Jews in Judea. 39

him give her a writing' of divorcement ; but I say unto you,
that whosoever shall put away his wife, saving1 for the cause
of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery ; and whoso
ever shall marry her that is divorced cornmitteth adultery,"
Matt. v. 31, 32. It is evident, from the manner in which
our Lord condemns all divorces, save those made for the
cause of fornication, that they did at this time put them in
practice upon other accounts. This appears also from the
questions put to him, concerning this matter, and the answers
he gave to them, and the surprize and uneasiness which
the disciples express at his decisions, when he forbade such
licentious divorces as those made " for every cause ; for they
said unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it
is not good to marry." See Matt. xix. 3, 10, Mark x.
2-9.

It is said, indeed, that when the pharisees brought these
questions, they came to him tempting him. But there
seems not to have been any danger of giving offence to the
Roman government, in this case, which way soever the
question was answered. The design could be only to
expose him to the resentment of the Jewish people, by
decisions contrary to practices they indulged themselves in,
and were very fond of; as I think appears likewise, from
the notice the disciples took of what he said upon this
subject.

However, this is no proof of any great degree of power in
the nation at this time. Josephus says, he put away his
second wife, because 'he did not like her manners/1 This
was after the destruction of Jerusalem, and he was settled at
Rome.

Justin Martyr, about the middle of the second century,
says, * That to that very day, their rabbies permitted them

* to have, each man, four or five wives.' k And ' that, wherever
' they were, they conversed with as many women as they

* pleased, and that under the notion of marriage.'1 Their
rabbies indulged them in these practices : and it seems, the
Romans did not interrupt them.

2. Our Lord says, " Ye have heard, that it was said by
them of old time, [or, to the ancients,] thou shalt not kill :
and whosoever shall kill, shall be in danger of the judg
ment," Matt. v. 21, 22. " But I say unto you, That whoso
ever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in

;

Mrj ape<Tfco/i£vo£ avrrjQ TOIQ rjOeffiv' in vit. p. 945. 44.
Omvf£ /ecu fi-(xp<- vvv Kai Ttavapag Kai TTSVTS fxtlv Vaf yvvaiKac, eica^ov
XwP«<«' Dialog, ii. p. 363. D. J ETTH « (rui/f^wparo i]v jSaXerai

Kai oaag fiaXtrai Xapfiaptiv yt'i/cu/caf, OTTOIOV Trparmaiv 01 ano TS

40 Credibility of the Gospel History.

danger of the judgment; and whosoever shall say to his
brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council."

Grotius™ supposes, that though the power of inflicting
capital punishments had been now for some time taken
away from the Jews, yet our Saviour alludes to those methods
of proceeding, which had been in use among them, and
were still fresh in their memory. Our Lord, I think, does
not declare at all, what power they now had, or made use
of; but from the mention of the words of their law, and
referring perhaps to the sense in which they then understood
it, that they who committed murder deserved punishment, and
that they who forbore that were innocent, proceeds to lay
down a more strict and pure morality. What he delivers, in
terms accommodated to their courts of judicature, is certainly
no representation of their conduct, or the state of things at
that time. For it cannot be thought, that every one, who was
angry with his brother without a cause, was then in danger
of the judgment; £ unless the word mean the judgment of
God ;] or that every one, who said to his brother,
Raca, was in danger of being brought by them before the
council.

3. Our Lord delivered many predictions concerning the
treatment, which his followers would meet with. Luke xi.
49. " Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send
them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall
slay and persecute." Matt. xx. 34. " Wherefore, behold,
I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes ; and
some of them shall ye kill and crucify, and some of them
shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them
from city to city." Mark xiii. 9, See John xvi. 2. " Take
heed to yourselves; for they shall deliver you up to the
councils ; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten ;
and ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my
sake."

These words of our Lord would, I think, be understood
by his hearers, agreeably to the state of things at that time,
whatever it was ; those punishments which are purely
Jewish, such as being scourged in their synagogues, or driven
from them, would be understood to be inflicted by Jewish
hands. If the Jews had not then the power of condemning
men to death ; the capital punishments spoken of, as to be in
flicted by them, would be understood to be brought about by
their means and procurement; unless it were thought, that the
words implied a prediction, that they would have supreme

i, Kara Travav yr}v ivQa av £7riSr]fir]<r(>}ffiv, r\
ayo/*£?'oi ovo/uan yaps jwaiKaq. ibid. p. 371. A. m Matt. v. 21.

The State of the Jews in Judea. 41

power, though they now had it not, and that then they would
use it for these purposes.

It can never be inferred from hence, that they had at this
time supreme power in Judea, or any where else. It is very
common to ascribe to men, not only those things they do
themselves, but those also which are brought about by their
means. In all languages, and in all countries, the punish
ment of an offender is ascribed to the prosecutor, the judg*e,
and the executioner, though this last only puts him to death
in the strictest sense. Thus it is certain, that Pilate con
demned our Lord, and his officers crucified him : Yet the
Jews are more than once said to have crucified Christ,
because his death was owing to their prosecution and
importunity. Cleophas, one of the disciples whom Jesus
met in the way to Emmaus, told him, Luke xxiv. 20,
" how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be
condemned to death, and have crucified him." The cruci
fying, as well as delivering up Jesus, is here ascribed to
the chief priests. Peter speaks to his hearers in this man
ner, Acts ii. 22, 23, " Ye men of Israel, hear these words ;
Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you — Him
ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and
slain." Again, chap. vi. 8, 10, " Peter, filled with the Holy
Ghost, said unto them, Ye rulers of the people and elders
of Israel — Be it known unto you all, and to the people of
Israel, that by the name of Jesus of Nazareth, whom ye
crucified, does this man stand here before you whole."

So Josephus says, that Herod reigned thirty-four years
after he had killed Antigonus.11 Though every one knows,
it was Mark Antony who beheaded Antigonus, at the
request of Herod.

And not only is this style used in relating facts that have
already happened, but 'also in predicting those that are
future. John viii. 28, " Then said Jesus unto them, When
ye have lift up the Son of man, &c." Though at other
times, when he speaks of his death, he represents the share
they would have in it more distinctly, Mark x. 33, " Saying,
Behold we go up to Jerusalem ; and the Son of man shall
be delivered unto the chief priests ; and they shall condemn
him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles"

In like manner, he thus represents the sufferings his fol
lowers would be exposed to. Mark xiii. 12, " Now the
brother shall betray the brother to death, and the father

cu & pev cnroKTeivac Avriyovov eKpctTJjcre rwv Trpay-
paruv srrj rtffcrapa /cat rpectKoira' Joseph, de Bell. lib. i. cap. 33. sect. 8.
Mt0' o piv cu-aAev kvTifovov, K. r. X. Antiq. p. 770. v. 37.

42 Credibility of the Gospel History.

the son ; and the children shall rise up against their parents,
and shall cause them to be put to death ; Kai Gava-ricauaiv
avT89, and shall put them to death." It never was legal, ac
cording to any constitution in the world, for children in a
private capacity to put their parents to death. And this
phrase is to be explained by those that go before, of be
traying or delivering, that is, accusing, and prosecuting
them, that they may be put to death.

In all these places, then, our Lord would be understood
by his hearers, according to the quality of the persons
spoken of, and the state of affairs at that time, whatever
it was.

The persecuting from city to city, is no argument of
supreme power any where. Acts xiii. 50, " The Jews
[at Antioch in Pisidia] stirred up the devout and honour
able women, and the chief men of the city, and raised
persecution against Paul and Barnabas, and expelled them
out of their coasts." Again, the same thing happened at
Iconium. Acts xiv. 4, 6, " But the multitude of the city
was divided, and part held with the Jews, and part with
the apostles. And when there was an assault made, both
of the Gentiles and also of the Jews — they were aware of it,
and fled unto Lystra and Derbe." And in many cities,
situated undoubtedly in countries subject to the Roman
jurisdiction, but in which the Jews had settlements, did they
foment disturbances against the apostles, and thus drive
them from place to place.

Further, our Lord bid his disciples to " beware of
men; for they will deliver you up to the councils, and
they will scourg'e you in their synagogues," Matt. x. 17,
xxiii. 34. It must be supposed, since the Jews had the free
exercise of their religion, and we often read of the ruler of
the synagogue, that the expelling from the synagogue, and
beating in the synagogues, were punishments purely Jewish,
and that they inflicted these penalties by their own proper
authority. The Jews agreed, in our Saviour's lifetime,
that " if any man did confess that he was the Christ, he
should be put out of the synagogue," John ix. 22. This
was a decree of theirs ; and they did actually cast out, or
excommunicate the man, that had been cured of his
blindness. St. Paul says, that before his conversion, " he
beat in every synagogue them that believed in Jesus," Acts
xxiii. 19. Nay, as they had settlements in many parts, and
were protected by the laws in the exercise of their religion,
it is not unlikely, that they inflicted this punishment also
out of Judea. St. Paul says, " of the Jews received I five

The State of the Jews in Judea. 43

times forty stripes save one," 2 Cor. xi. 24. He usually
made so short a stay when he came into Judea, the several
times he was there after his conversion, that it is most likely
these scourgings had happened, most or all of them, in
some other country. Epiphanus, who lived in the fourth
century, informs us, that one Joseph, a Jew, whom he knew,
having received a book of the gospels from a Christian
bishop, and being surprised by some of his countrymen
when he was reading it, they took the book out of his
hands with great violence, threw him on the ground,
* dragged him to the synagogue, and there beat him.'n

Uriel Acosta suffered this punishment in the synagogue
at Amsterdam, in the last century, of which he has himself
published a curious relation.0 This, therefore, must be
reckoned one of those lesser penalties, which they had a
right to inflict in Judea, and possibly out of it.

4. The question brought to our Saviour about tribute is
remarkable. Matt. xxii. 15, 20, " Then went the pharisees,
and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk ;
and they sent out their disciples, saying, We know that
thou teachest the way of God in truth. Is it lawful to g'ive
tribute to Caesar or not? But Jesus perceived their wicked
ness, [craftiness, Luke xx. 23.] and said, Why tempt ye
me, ye hypocrites ? show me the tribute-money. And they
brought him a penny : and he saith unto them, Whose is
this image and superscription ? And they say unto him,
Caesar's." This is a proof the emperor's coin was current
among them, and that they paid tribute to him. St. Luke's
introduction to this story is in these words : Luke xx. 20>
" And they watched him, and sent forth spies, which should
feign themselves just men, that they might take hold of his
words, that so they might deliver him unto the power and
authority of the governor.5'

5. In the eighth chapter of St. John we have another en
snaring question put to our Saviour. " The scribes and
pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery :
and when they had set her in the midst, they say unto him,
Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act :
Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be
stoned ; but what sayest thou ^"i1 It is evident this was an

n A-iraysai pev tig rr\v avvaywy^v KO.I fiaTiZsviv avrov' Epiph. 1. i. Tom.
ii. c. 11. Haeres. 30. Vid. etiam Grot, ad Matt. x. 17. ° Vid. Limborch.
Amic. Collat. p. 349, 350. P It is well known, there are very strong

objections brought by learned men against the genuineness of this paragraph
of St. John's Gospel concerning the woman taken in adultery. Vid. Millii. N.
T. Edit. Kusteri, et S. Basnage. Annal. Polit. Eccl. A. D. 32. n. 50. But I
do not take any advantage of these objections.

44 Credibility of the Gospel History.

ensnaring question, for St. John adds, ver. 6, " This they said
tempting him, that they might have to accuse him."

The speech they made, seems to me very artful, and it is
not easy to say, which way they desired to have their
question answered. But they seem to have suggested the
strongest reasons they could, against his determining, that
they ' might not stone her.' Perhaps, therefore, they wished
he would say, they ought to obey the law of Moses. Now,
if the Romans did not allow them at that time to inflict this
punishment in this case, here would have been matter of
accusation before the governor, if the question were resolved
by him.

Our Lord, however, gives a most surprising and unlooked-
for decision. " So when they continued asking him, he lift
up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin,
let him first cast a stone at her, ver. 7. And they which
heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out
one by one, beginning at the eldest even unto the last," ver.
9. It gives one, indeed, a terrible idea of the wickedness of
that people at that time ; but I think, it is evident from
hence, that all then present, were guilty of crimes of a like
nature with that they charged this woman with. And I should
think it may be concluded, with some probability, from the
decision our Saviour pronounced, that they had not at this
time the power of stoning any one for this crime ; because
the design of the answer given them at last by our Saviour
seems to have been, to show them how unworthy they were
of the power of inflicting capital punishments ; and to in
timate, that they ought not to expect to be restored to the
authority they wished for, whilst they were so universally^
corrupt. And how little they deserved to be entrusted
with the administration of justice, appears from their no
torious partiality ; see Deut. xxii. 23, 24 : for if this woman
was taken in the act, as they said, they might have brought
the man also. This our Saviour takes no notice of; they
were a set of men, whom it was in vain to argue with in a
direct way. The decision he gave is a proof of the highest
wisdom, and had the effect to fill them for the present, with
confusion.

6. They had their councils ; these were summoned, met,

i There is a remarkable passage to this purpose in the speech of Josephus to
the Jew's in Jerusalem, while Titus with the Roman army lay before the city.
HoQtv S1 tjpZantOa d&Xttac;; ap' ax1 fK^aaewg TUV irpoyovuv, OTB rf Api^o(3s\s
Krai Ypicavs }iavia, KO.I rj irpog aXXrjXag epig, Hofjnrrjiov CTrijyayf ry TroXa, /cat
Pwfiaioig virtTa'&v 6 OSOQ TSQ SK aZi&Q (Xev9spiag. Joseph, de Bell. 1. V. cap.
9. sect. 4.

The State of the Jews in Judea. 45

issued out orders. There is also frequent mention of their
forming designs to apprehend Jesus and put him to
death.

Jesus having healed a man with a withered hand on the
sabbath-day, the " pharisees held a council against him, how
they might destroy him," Matt. xii. 14. The man that had
been cured by him at the pool of Bethesda, having told the
Jews, that it was " Jesus that had made him whole," it is
said, " therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus, and sought
to slay him, because he had done these things on the sab
bath-day. John v. 15 — 18. But Jesus answered them, My
Father worketh hitherto, and I work. Therefore the Jews
sought the more to kill him, not only because he had broken
the sabbath, but said also that God was his father, making'
himself equal with God. Ch. vii. 1. After these things,
Jesus walked in Galilee : for he would not walk in Jewry,
because the Jews sought to kill him. Ver. 25. Then said
some of Jerusalem, Is not this he whom they seek to kill ?
Ver. 32. The pharisees heard that the people murmured
such things concerning him : and the pharisees and chief
priests sent officers to take him. Ch. x. 39. Therefore
they sought again to take him, but he escaped out of their
hands." After he had raised Lazarus, some of them that
were by, " went their ways to the pharisees, and told them
what things Jesus had uone. Ch. xi. 45, 47. Then ga
thered the chief priests and the pharisees a council, and said,
What do we ? For this man does many miracles ? Ver. 53.
Then from that day forth they took counsel together for to
put him to death. But the chief priests consulted, that they
might put Lazarus also to death," Ch. xii. 10.

7. But the actual apprehending, trial, and prosecution of
Jesus, is the most particular and material instance of their
authority in this period. And, if I mistake not, the method
of proceeding in this affair does explain the nature of all
those designs hitherto mentioned to put Jesus to death, ex
cepting only clandestine or tumultuous attempts.

It will suffice to transcribe St. Matthew's account, taking
in, here and there, a circumstance from the other evange
lists.

Matt. xxvi. 3, 4. " Then assembled together the chief
priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, unto
the palace of the high priest, which was called Caiaphas,
and consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and
kill him. Ver. 14—16. Then one of the twelve, called
Judas Iscariot, went unto the chief priests. And they
covenanted with him for thirty pieces of silver. And from

46 Credibility of the Gospel History.

that time he sought opportunity to betray him." Ver. 47.
When Jesus was in the garden, whither he had retired after
supper, " lo, Judas one of the twelve, came ; and with him
a great multitude with swords and staves from the chief
priests and elders of the people." St. John says, ch. xviii.
3, " Judas then having received a band of men and officers
from the chief priests and pharisees.1 " This band must be a
company of soldiers. Our Saviour is evidently apprehended
by the authority of the Jewish council ; but beside the
officers of the high priest, here are soldiers, taken, it is
likely, with the governor's leave, from the guard con
stantly kept by the Romans at Jerusalem. This may be
inferred, from the Jews going to the governor, after our
Saviour's crucifixion, for a guard to secure the sepulchre,
which he readily granted. Matt, xxvii. 64, 66. And it is
likely, had done the same now, to assist the officers of the
high priest, if any disturbance should happen.

Ver. 50. " Then came they, and laid hands on Jesus, and
took him." St. Luke informs us, that when they came to
apprehend Jesus, chap. xxii. 52, " He said unto the chief
priests and Captains of the Temple,* and the elders which
were come to him ; Be ye come out as 'against a thief, with
swords and staves'?" And St. John says, ch. xviii. 12, 13,
Then the " band and the Captqinf and officers of the Jews
took Jesus, and bound him, and led him away." Who this
captain, or captains of the temple were, whether Roman
or Jewish officers, has been doubted. I think they were
Jewish officers, who presided there over the priests and
Levites, and the inferior officers of the temple. u This I may
show more particularly hereafter, but now we pass on.
Matt. xxvi. 57, " and they that had laid hold on Jesus, led
him away to Caiaphas the high priest, where the scribes
and elders were assembled. Now the chief priests and
elders, and all the council, sought false witness against Jesus,
to put him to death, but found none : yea, though many
false witnesses came, yet found they none. At last came
two false witnesses, and said, This fellow said, I am able to
destroy this temple, and build it in three days. And
the high priest arose, and said, Answerest thou nothing ?
What is it that these witness against thee ? But Jesus held
his peace. And the high priest answered and said unto
him, I adjure thee by the living* God, that thou tell us,

O sv IndciQ \a(3<i)v rv\v (TTrapai', /cat CK TWV apxifp^wv KO.I Qapivaiojv inrt]~
s EITTC 7rpo£ TSQ Tra^aytvofJuvsQ e?r' avrov ap^ifptif, KOI <rparj/y8f ra
e. * H sv (TTTfipa KCIL 6 ^iXiap%o£ jcai 01 vTniptrai TUV

u Vid. Grot, ad Matt. xxvi. 45. Whitby, Luke xxii. 52.

The State of the Jews in Judea. 47

whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus saith
unto him, Thou hast said ; nevertheless I say unto you,
Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right
hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. Then
the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken
blasphemy : What think ye ? They answered and said, He
is guilty of death." Ver. 59, 66.

St. Mark delivers their sentence in these words, Mark
xiv. 64. " Then the high priest saith — Ye have heard the
blasphemy? What think ye? And they all condemned him
to be guilty of death."

These are the proceedings of the council, while Jesus was
before them.

Matt, xxvii. 1, 2. " When the morning was come, all
the chief priests and elders of the people took counsel
against Jesus, to put him to death. And when they had
bound him, they led him away and delivered him to
Pontius Pilate the governor." See Mark xv. 1, Luke
xxiii. 1.

St. John observes, ch. xviii. 28, 29, that the Jewish elders
not entering into " the judgment-hall, lest they should be
defiled, Pilate went out unto them, and said, What accusa
tion bring you against this man ?"

Having* heard from them what things they had to lay to his
charge, Pilate examined Jesus : having so done, " he said to
the chief priests and the people, Luke xxiii. 4 — 8, I find no
fault in this man; and they were the more fierce, saying', He
stirreth up the people, teaching throughout all Jewry, be
ginning from Galilee to this place. When Pilate heard of
Galilee," he sent Jesus to Herod, who was then at Jerusa
lem. — He, having mocked him, sent him again to Pilate.
Being therefore again returned to him, ver. 13 — 16, " Pilate,
when he had called together the chief priests and the rulers,
and the people, said unto them, Ye have brought this man
unto me as one that perverteth the people : and behold I
having examined him before you, have found no fault in
this man, touching those things whereof ye accuse him.
No, nor yet Herod. — I will therefore chastise him, and re
lease him." They desired that he would rather release
Barabbas; ver. 17— 24. "Pilate therefore willing tore-
lease Jesus, spake again to them ; but they cried, saying,
Crucify him, crucify him. And he said unto them the third
time, Why, what evil hath he done? I have found no
cause of death in him ; I will therefore chastise him, and
let him go. And they were instant with loud voices, re
quiring that he might be crucified, and the voices of them

48 Credibility of the Gospel History.

and of the chief priests prevailed ; and Pilate gave sentence,
that it should be as they required."

A few remarks will be needful. The Jewish council
having- adjudged that Jesus was guilty of death, or that
according to their law he deserved to die, they carry him
to Pilate, and produce their charges against him. It is
surprising, that they should do this, if they had themselves
the power of life and death. A people fond of authority
and power, would not have committed to a foreigner a
cause that was within their own jurisdiction. If they had
not the power of life and death in this case, they had it not in
any. For the only crime, that Jesus was supposed to be
convicted of before them, was that of blasphemy, or as
suming without foundation the character of the Messias.
The evangelists are extremely unanimous in this point :
Matt. xxvi. 59, 60. " Now the high priests, and all the
council sought false witness against him, but found none ;
yea though many false witnesses came, yet found they

none. Mark xiv. 56. Many bare false witness against him,

but their witness agreed not together." St. Matthew, ch. xxvi.
59, 63-66, St. Mark, ch. xiv. 60—64, St. Luke, ch. xxii. 69—
71, have particularly informed us, that the condemnation
passed by the council upon Jesus was founded upon the
declaration he made, that he was the Christ, when the high
priest had adjured him to tell them who he was. And St.
John says, chap. xix. 7, this was what they insisted on be
fore Pilate : " We have a law, and by our law he ought to
die, because he made himself the Son of God." As, there
fore, the only fact which they had the proof of, was that of our
Lord's own confession made before them, which they called
blasphemy ; if they had had the power of inflicting death in
this case, they would have punished him accordingly, by
their own authority, and not have carried him to Pilate.

They did indeed accuse him before Pilate of many things,
and said, he stirred up the people, and the like. But these
appear to have been merely malicious inventions of their own,
without any ground in the least from any action they knew
of, or that had been proved, when he was under examina
tion before them ; or else, were conclusions they pretended to
draw, and insinuated to the governor, must be the conse
quence of Jesus's confession and declaration, that he was
the Christ. And it seems to me, that this declaration of his
was the only ground of all these charges, from what St.
Luke says, chap, xxiii. 2, " and they began to accuse him,
saying, We found this fellow perverting the nation, and for
bidding to give tribute to Caesar, saying, that he himself is

The State of the Jews in Judea. 49

Christ a King ; as also from what St. John relates, chap.
xix. 13, " the Jews cried, saying-, If thou let this man go,
thou art not Caesar's friend : whosoever maketh himself a
King, speaketh against Csesar ;" as likewise, because this
was the thing which Pilate seems more especially to have
informed himself about. For he asked him, " art thou the
king of the Jews ?" John xviii. 33. Where we have the
answer that Jesus returned him to ver. 38. Pilate per
ceiving there was nothing criminal in this pretension of Jesus,
went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, " I find
in him no fault at all." There being no crime in this, he
was fully satisfied of his innocence.

Perhaps, it will be objected against this, that the title set
upon the cross, of " Jesus of Nazareth king of the Jews,"
is a proof the crime he was condemned for by Pilate, was
that of sedition, or high treason. But I think, this is no
proof of any such thing. For Pilate judging', that our
Saviour was really innocent, [since it was the Roman cus
tom to put some title,] might write what he pleased. And
our Lord had satisfied Pilate, there was nothing seditious in
the claim he made under that character, forasmuch as his
kingdom was not of this world. But I contend not about
this. It is not at all material, what was the pretended
crime for which Pilate at last condemned Jesus.

Blasphemy was the only crime, of which Jesus was sup
posed to be convicted before the council ; and yet these
Jewish high priests and elders carried him to the governor ;
and it appears from the sequel, that Pilate was the siipreme
judge in this cause, and the master of the event. For he
gives the case a fresh hearing, asks the Jews what accu
sation they brought, examined Jesus : and when he had done
so, told them, he found in him no fault at all. This his
conduct is a full proof, that he was the judge, and that they
were only prosecutors and accusers.

Pilate, indeed, proposes to them, which he should release
to them, Barabbas or Jesus. But certainly he does not appeal
to them as judges. This is evident from the persons to whom
he addressed himself with this proposal, namely, the people,
the multitude ; which never had among- the Jews, a legal
power of life and death. Matt, xxviii. 15. " At that feast
the governor was wont to release unto the people a prisoner,
whom they would. Ver. 17. Therefore, when they were
gathered together, Pilate said unto them, Whom will ye
that I release unto you ? ver. 20. But the chief priests and
elders persuaded the multitude that they should ask Barab
bas, and destroy Jesus." See Mark xv. 8—15. This ap-

VOL. i. E

50 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Eeal to the people seems to have been only to discern, how
ir lie might act in this matter consistent with the peace of
the province, which depended upon the disposition of the
people.

Moreover, Pilate at length pronounced the sentence. John
xix. 19, He wrote the title upon the cross, and would not alter
what he had written, though desired by the high priests.
When the sentence was pronounced, the (Matt, xxvii. &7, 28,)
" soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the common-hall,
and gathered unto them the whole band of soldiers, and
they stripped him, ver. 31, and put on him a scarlet robe,
and led him away to crucify him." Ver. 54. The cruci
fixion was performed by these soldiers, under the command
of a centurion. — Ver. 58. " Joseph of Arimathea went to
Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus. Then Pilate com
manded the body to be delivered. The chief priests and
pharisees came to Pilate, desiring that he would command,
that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day. Pilate
said unto them, Ye have a watch, go your way, make it as
sure as you can. Ver. 66, So they went and made the sepul
chre sure, sealing the stone, and setting a watch."

These soldiers were entirely accountable to Pilate. For
when (Matt, xxviii. 11 — 14) " some of the watch came into
the city, and showed unto the chief priests all the things
that were done, they gave large money unto the soldiers,
saying, Say ye, His disciples came by night and stole him
away while we slept : and if this come to the governor's
ears, we will persuade him and secure you.

Beside the light we receive into this matter, from the pro
ceedings relating to our Saviour himself, we learn that
Pilate had in his custody divers prisoners which were of the
Jewish nation : for it could- be such only, that it can be
supposed, they should desire to have released to them. And
it seems, it had been an usual custom with him, during his
government, to release to them some prisoner at that feast ;
" and the multitude crying aloud, began to desire him to
do, as he had ever done unto them." Mark xv. 8. See
Matt, xxvii. 15.

When Pilate said unto them, John xviii. 31, " Take ye
him, and judge him according to your law ; the Jews said
unto him, it is not lawful for us to put any man to death."

As they here affirm expressly, that they had not the
power of life and death, so Pilate told our Saviour that He
had. John xix. 10. " Then Pilate said unto him, Knowest
thou not, that I have power to crucify thee, and have
power to release thee?"

The State of the Jews in Judea. 51

So that the whole course of the proceedings in this trans
action, and these express declarations of these two parties,
the high priests and elders on the one hand, and Pilate
on the other, assure us, that the Jewish nation had not, at
this time, within themselves, the power of life and death
upon any occasion.

VI. But yet there are some expressions of the evangelists,
relating to this matter, that may require consideration.

1. There is a prediction of our Lord, concerning the man
ner of his death, related by John, with the evangelist's own
reflection : ch. xii. 32. " And I, if I be lifted up from the
earth, will draw all men unto me. This he said, signifying
what death he should die." Again, ch. xviii. 31, 33.
" Then Pilate said unto them, Take ye him, and judge him
according to your law. The Jews therefore said unto him,
It is not lawful for us to put any man to death. That the
saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spake, signify
ing what death he should die."

Possibly, some may hence conclude, that the Jews had
the power of putting men to death ; and therefore the evan
gelist observes that the fulfilment of this prediction was re
markable; since, though they had the power, yet they dis
claimed, and would not exercise it upon this occasion.

But without this supposition, the accomplishment of this
prediction was remarkable on two accounts : first, in that
he did not die a natural death : and secondly, that he was
not put to death in a tumult ; but his death was the result
of a legal process, according to the form of government
which then obtained in that country. No man, without a
prophetic spirit, could foresee certainly, that he should not
die a natural death ; and yet, perhaps, it was more extra
ordinary to foresee, that he should escape all the sudden at
tempts upon his life. We have many of these recorded in
the evangelists ; but, notwithstanding, he suffered as a
criminal by the sentence of the government.

And the meaning of the evangelists in the last mentioned
place, I think, is this : the Jews said, It is not lawful for us
to put any man to death ; and hereby, that is, by their not
having the power of inflicting capital punishments, it came
to pass that the words of Jesus were fulfilled, in which he
had predicted, that he should be crucified ; that being a
Roman, and not an ordinary Jewish punishment.

2. Perhaps some may think, their departing willingly at
this time from their right, is implied in the phrase, " deliver
ing up to the Gentiles ;" which our Lord made use of some
times when he spoke of his death. Mark x. 33. See Luke

52 Credibility of the Gospel History.

xviii. 32. " Behold we go up to Jerusalem, and the Son of
man shall be delivered unto the chief priests, and unto the
scribes : and they shall condemn him to death, and shall
deliver him to the Gentiles :" and after the council had
condemned Jesus, Matt, xxvii. 2, it is said, " when they had
bound him they led him away, and delivered him to Pontius
Pilate the Governor."

Hereby some may be pleased to understand, that for some
reasons, the Jews voluntarily surrendered him to Pilate ;
though, if they had thought fit, they might have put him to
death themselves.

But this is not the meaning of this word in the New Tes
tament, as is evident from the first text here quoted, Mark
x. 33. Judas, of whom that delivery to the chief priests is
intended, released no right. The word is often used to express
the acts of private persons, who accused, prosecuted, be
trayed, or any other way contributed to the bringing an
other before a court of justice, in order to be condemned and
put to death. Matt. x. 17 — 21. " But beware of men, for
they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will
scourge you in their synagogues, and ye shall be brought
before governors and kings for my sake : but when they
deliver you up, take no thought, how, or what ye shall
speak. And the brother shall deliver the brother to death,
and the father the child." Mark xiii. 11. " But when
they shall lead you and deliver you up, take no thought
beforehand." And in the next verse, betraying is used for
delivering. " Now the brother shall betray the brother,
and the father the son."

3. But still some may suspect, that they might have
some particular reasons, for not employing at this time all
the authority they were possessed of. For St. Luke says,
ch. xxii. 2, " And the chief priests and scribes sought how
they might kill him, for they feared the people." And St.
Matthew, ch. xxvi. 4, 5, " that they consulted that they
might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill him. But they said,
Not on the feast-day, lest there be any uproar among the
people." Possibly, therefore, suspecting the affections of
the people, they might be willing to decline the odium of
this action, and throw it upon Pilate.

But whatever apprehensions they might have concerning
the people at first, yet when they had seized Jesus without
any disturbance, and many had shown their forwardness in
coming in to them, and bringing them false accusations
against him, these fears might then be pretty well over.
And certainly, they could be in no fear of the people, after

The State of the Jews in Judea. 53

the multitude had unanimously demanded with loud voices,
that Barabbas might be released, and Jesus crucified. For
that offer which Pilate made them, John xix. 6, " saying*,
Take ye him, and crucify him," was plainly after that the
people had petitioned for Barabbas. Ch. xviii. 40, " Then
cried they all again, saying, Not this man, but Barabbas."
If they could have put any man to death, would not they
now have joyfully accepted this offer which Pilate made
them ? Would they not have been willing now to merit
with the people, by putting* to death a man whom they
disliked as well as themselves, if before they were afraid to
kill one, whom they suspected the people were fond of?

4. And this brings me to another difficulty. For it may
be said, If the Jews had not the power of life and death,
what could Pilate mean by saying, John xviii. 31, " Take ye
him, and judg*e him according to your law ?" And again
ch. xix. 6, " Take ye him and crucify him, for I find no
fault in him ?"

I answer, that Pilate's meaning in the first place is very
evident, and the answer they make him, shows they had not
the power of life and death. The context is thus : " Then
led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment."
They scrupling to go in, Pilate " went out unto them, and
said, What accusation bring you against this man ? They
answered and said unto him, If he were not a malefactor,
we would not have delivered him up unto thee. Then said
Pilate, Take ye him and judge him according to your law ;"
that is, go then and punish him yourselves. John xviii.
28 — 31, " The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not law
ful for us to put any man to death ;" that is, - This is a

* criminal we cannot punish according to his deserts. It is not
4 one of the lesser faults, for which we are wont to scourge

* men, or to cast out of the synagogue ; but he is guilty of
' blasphemy, which by our law ought to be punished with

* death, And since we are not permitted to punish any man

* capitally, we have brought him to your tribunal, where

* alone we can have satisfaction.'

The other words are thus introduced : Pilate had scourged
Jesus, platted a crown of thorns upon him, and offered him
other indignities, hoping hereby to pacify the Jewish rage,
and save his life : and goes out, " and saith unto them,
Behold, I bring him forth to you, that ye may know that I
find no fault in him :" he is an innocent man, and I cannot
punish him as you desire. " When the chief priests there
fore," John xix. 1 — 6, " and officers saw him, they cried
out saying, Crucify him, crucify him. Pilate saith unta

54 Credibility of the Gospel History.

them, Take ye him and crucify him, for I find no fault in
him." It is not unlikely, that some may suppose, the word
crucify here, ought to be interpreted by the general word
judge, used before. But I think, the most natural meaning of
Pilate's words here is this : * You must crucify him then
' yourselves, if you can commit such a villainy, for I cannot.

* He appears to me innocent, as I have told you already ;
' and I have now punished him as much, or more than he
' deserves.'

The answer they make again, goes upon the supposition,
that they could not take away any man's life. Ver. 7,
" The Jews answered him, We have a law and by our law he
ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God ;"
that is, ' Indeed, Sir, you need not be so scrupulous ; he

* is a blasphemer, and by our law all such ought to be put
6 to death. And if you do not condemn him to death, we
' shall think you do not pay that respect to our law which
' you ought to do.' And then they threaten him with the
general resentment of the nation^ if he would not punish
capitally the most heinous violation of their law.

This discourse which now passed between Pilate and the
chief priests, is a proof, they had not the power of life and
death ; and that the intent of what Pilate said, is not, that
they might crucify him if they pleased : if this had been
Pilate's meaning, and they could have legally executed
Jesus, would they have put a matter they were intent upon
to an uncertain issue ? would they have refused to take the
cause into their own hands, when they saw the governor
was backward to gratify their intentions ? Their still press
ing Pilate to pronounce a sentence of death, is a proof, that
they knew very well, if Jesus was not condemned by Pilate
he must be set at liberty.

5. But though these particulars, thus laid together, ap
pear decisive ; and the Jews here, in a most critical season,
say expressly, that it was " not lawful for them to put any
man to death ;" yet in another place, there are some Jews,
who seem to assert, they had at that time an absolute
freedom. John viii. 31 — 33, " Then said Jesus unto the
Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my words>
then are ye my disciples indeed. And ye shall know the
truth, and the truth shall make you free. They answered
him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to
any man : how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free ?"

It is not very material to enquire at present, who they
were who made this reply to our Saviour ; whether the be
lievers before spoken of, who seem not to have owned

The State of the Jews in Judea. 55

him upon right grounds ; or * whether they were unbeliev-

* ing Jews, who hypocritically joined themselves with these
' new professors, with intent of taking some private oppor-

* tunity of kill ing v him.' What we are concerned with is the
reply itself.

If these Jews do not speak here of civil temporal liberty,
and of a freedom from all foreign jurisdiction, then we have
no concern with them at present ; but if they do, (as it is
generally supposed,) they deserve no regard at all : for then,
what they here say is a downright contradiction of God
himself in the solemn preamble to the law at mount Sinai,
" I am the Lord thy God, that brought thee out of the land
of Egypt, out of the house of bondage." There is no
relying upon the word of such men as these. Notwithstand
ing they ask " how sayest thou ye shall be made free," as
if they could be no freer than they were, they might at that
time be downright slaves. For they who scrupled not to
contradict God himself, with reference to the time past,
might well have assurance to deny a fact evident to every
man's sense and reason at that time. Our Lord, indeed, does
not deny the truth of what they said : it was to no purpose
so to do. But with an unexampled firmness he prosecutes
the subject he was upon: ver. 34, " Jesus answered them,
Verily I say unto you, whosoever committeth sin is the
servant of sin."

But though the most express declarations of such men
can never assure us of the truth, yet their angry reply to
our Saviour, this fierce disclaiming the charge of subjection,
upon so small, upon no occasion at all, affords more than a
presumption they were not free at this time. An insinuation
of their being in subjection, if such had been given, would
have been treated with contempt, and not answered with
indignation, if they had had all the power their proud hearts
desired.

6. There is another text hitherto omitted, which some
may think deserves notice. John xi. 47, 48, " Then gathered
the chief priests and pharisees a council and said, What do
we ? for this man doth many miracles. If we let this man
alone, all men will believe on him, and the Romans shall
come and take away both our place and nation. Some may
apprehend these words imply, that there was then no Roman
government established in Judea.

I presume there is no necessity of inquiring, at present,
into the views of this speech. All I shall say, by way of
answer, is, 1. That this speech supposes that they were in
v See Dr. Clarke's Paraphrase upon this text.

56 Credibility of the Gospel History.

subjection to the Romans, otherwise, " all men's believing
on Jesus," could not have been any offence to the Romans,
or be pretended to be so. 2. The meaning of these words
is, that then the Romans would no longer protect them in
their religion and laws, and treat them as subjects, but send
an army- to destroy them, as rebels and enemies.

A passage of Josephus will illustrate this text. The
Samaritans had obstructed the Galileans in their way to
Jerusalem, and killed some of them. The chief men of
Galilee complain toCumanus the procurator, and demanded
justice. He took a bribe from the Samaritans, and let the
matter pass. « The Galileans then being exasperated, per-
' suaded the multitude of the Jews to betake themselves to
' arms and assert their liberty. Servitude, they said, was
6 grievous in itself, but to be insulted under it, was altogether
' intolerable.' w Josephus says, that the chief men of Jerusa
lem, dreading the issue, endeavoured by all means to ap
pease the people ; ' and bid them set before their eyes the
utter ruin of their country, the conflagration of their
temple, the captivity and slavery of themselves, their
wives and children ; and as they would avoid these dread
ful calamities, beseeched them to alter their present de
signs.' x What is this but the " Romans coming and taking
away both their place and nation?" which words, as I
observed, imply a present subjection : and this state they
appear evidently to have been in, when that exhortation was
given, which I have just transcribed from Josephus.

I have now set before the reader the main passages of
this period, concerning the power the Jews were possessed
of in their own country. The sum is, they practised their
own religious rites, worshipped at the temple and in their
synagogues, followed their own customs, and lived very
much according to their own laws. They had their high
priests, council or senate, inflicted lesser punishments ; they
could apprehend men, and bring them before the council ;
and if a guard of soldiers was needful, could be assisted by
them, upon asking the governor for them : they could bind
men and keep them in custody: the council could summon
witnesses, take examinations, and when they had any capi
tal offenders carry them before the governor. This go
vernor usually paid a regard to what they offered ; and, if

w AsXtiav yap /cat /caQ1 avrrjv \ttv Trt/cpav t\£yov tivai, rr]v e0' vj3pet de
TravTcnraaiv a^oprjrov. x Kai TTfiOovrtg Trpo otyOaXp-wv Sep,£V&g Karctff-

Krtt0?7<70jU£v?;v p-ev avTwv rr\v Trarpi^a, TO $E itpov TrvpTroXfjO^o'Ojuei'ov, avrwv Se
KO.I yvvaiKdiv GVV TtKvoiQ av^paTTo^ifffjis^ tffo/Jiev&G, [ifTaOfaOai TOV XoywjuoiA.
Joseph. Ant. lib. xx. c. 5. sect. 1.

The State of the Jews in Juded. 57

they brought evidence of the fact, pronounced sentence
according to their laws. But he was the proper judge in
all capital causes; for when the council of the Jews had
had before them a case, which they pretended was of this
kind, having prepared it, they go with it immediately to
the governor, who re-examines it, and pronounces the sen
tence.

VII. The next period reaches from our Saviour's resur
rection, to the reign of Herod, mentioned in the twelfth of
the Acts of the Apostles.

I shall set down all the facts mentioned in this interval,
which relate to this subject ; after I have just observed, that
we have here no notice taken of any Roman officer or
president in the country. It does not follow there was none
all this time, but it was proper to observe it here, though
the reason of this omission do not appear. And this is one
reason why I have made a distinct period of this interval.

1. The first fact is a case that followed soon after the
cure wrought by Peter and John, upon the lame man that

lay at the gate of the temple. Acts iv. 1 — 3, " And as

they spake unto the people, the priests, and the captain of

the temple, and the Sadducees came upon them and

they laid hands on them, and put them in hold unto the
next day : for it was now eventide." — Ver. 5 — 10. And
" it came to pass on the morrow, that their rulers, and
elders, and scribes, and Annas the high priest, and Caia-
phas, — were gathered together at Jerusalem. And when
they had set them in the midst, they asked, By what power,
or in what name have ye done this ? Then Peter filled with
the Holy Ghost, said unto them, Ye rulers of the people

and elders of Israel, — Be it known unto you." Peter

having made his defence " When they had commanded

them [Peter and John] to go aside out of the council, they

conferred among themselves." Their resolution was,

ver. 15 — 21, " That it spread no farther among the people,
let us straitly threaten them, that they speak henceforth to
no man in this name — and having threatened them, they let
them go."

A council was called ; Peter and John were apprehended
by Jewish officers, put in prison, brought before the coun
cil, examined, threatened, dismissed. No penalty is inflict
ed, and what punishment was threatened is not said.

2. The next case is in the following chapter. Acts v.
17, 18, " Then the high priest rose up, and all they that
were with him, (which is the sect of the Sadducees,) and
were filled with indignation. And laid their hands on the

58 Credibility of the Gospel Histoiy.

apostles, and put them in the common prison." The apos
tles were delivered out of prison that night by an angel,
and went to the " temple, early in the morning and taught.
But the high priest came, and they that were with him, and
called the council together, and all the senate of the chil
dren of Israel, and sent to the prison to have them brought."
—The officers not finding them in the prison, returned to
the council, informing them of it. " Now when the high
priest, and the captain of the temple, and the chief priests
heard these things, they doubted of them whereunto this
would grow." Having received information that the apos
tles were in the temple, " Then went the captain with the
officers, and brought them without violence. — And when
they had brought them they set them before the council :
and the high priest asked them, saying, ver. 21 — 28, " Did
not we straitly command you, that you should not teach in
this name ?" Peter and the rest of the apostles made their
defence. " When they heard that, they were cut to the
heart, and took council to slay them." Gamaliel then stood
up, and desired the apostles to be put forth a little space :
and gave his opinion in these words ; " And now I say unto
you, refrain from these men and let them alone. And to
nim they agreed. Ver. 40, And when they had called the
apostles and beaten them, they commanded that they should
not speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go."

We have here a . fact or circumstance or two, not men
tioned before. The apostles were put into the common
prison.? But we are told in the former instance in this
period, Acts iv. 3, " they laid hands on them, [Peter and
John,] and put them in hold,2 unto the next day." And in
the former period we find, that our Saviour was bound by
the high priest's authority. St. John says, he was bound as
soon as apprehended ; ch. xviii. 12, " Then the band, and
the captain, and officers of the Jews took Jesus and bound
him :" though St. Matthew does not speak of it, till he
comes to relate his being carried from the high priest to
Pilate : and " when they had bound him, they led him
away, and delivered him to Pontius Pilate," Matt, xxvii. 2.
See Mark xv. 1.

However, there can be no doubt, I think, but the power
of apprehending implies also the power of keeping in
custody. Sometimes a prisoner might be kept all night in
the high priest's house, as our Saviour seems to have been,
when they intended to meet again the next morning. At
other times they might send their prisoners to the common

y Kat eOsvro avrsg iv TV}pi}ati dt)noai<f. z E&j/ro £t£

The State of the Jews in Judea. 59

or public prison, as in the case before us ; for it is not at
all unlikely, that they had the free use of it, and that the
place of confinement was at their own discretion.

Another particular here is, that the apostles were beaten.
We often meet in the New Testament with whipping1 in the
synagogues : but it is likely, this was a more public beat
ing. And possibly the ruler, and chief men of every syna
gogue, had the right of appointing a whipping there : this
punishment now ordered by the sanhedrim, it is likely, was
in some open market-place, whereby the sufferers were
exposed ; and therefore it is said, Acts v. 41, " And
they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing
that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his
name."

There is one thing more we ought to observe here ; the
apostles were beaten, and yet it is said, that they agreed to
Gamaliel, whose advice was, that they should refrain from
these men, and let them alone. This implies, that they had
the power of inflicting, or procuring at least, a heavier
punishment than that of whipping or beating. And it
is said, they took counsel to slay them. But, I think, this
does not imply, that they could by their own authority put
them to death. Forasmuch as this is said of their designs
against Jesus, and yet it has appeared, I presume, that they
could not themselves legally, or according to the constitu
tion of things at that time, put him to death. Thus St.
Matthew says, ch. xxvi. 3,4, " Then assembled together the
chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people,
unto the palace of the high priest — and consulted that they
might take Jesus by subtilty and kill him." See Luke xxii.
2, 3. And after he had been apprehended, examined, con
victed, and condemned by them, as far as their authority
reached ; — " When the morning was come, all the chief
priests and elders of the people took counsel against Jesus
to put him to death," Matt, xxvii. 1. See Mark xv. 1. As
therefore this phrase in the gospels, when used concerning*
the proceedings against our Saviour, can mean no more,
than their resolving to prosecute him before the governor as
a criminal worthy of death, and consulting together how
they might manage the prosecution, and get him condemned
to death ; so it is not unlikely, that the phrase ought to be
understood in the same sense here: and when Gamaliel
advises them to refrain from these men and let them alone,
for any thing that appears, he must be understood to dis
suade them from pursuing their resentment, so far as to pro
secute them before the governor, as men worthy of death ;

60 Credibility of the Gospel History.

and only to threaten them afresh, and if they thought fit,
order them to be beaten, as we find they did.

3. The next affair of this kind, which we meet with in the
Acts, is the prosecution and death of Stephen : the occasion
and circumstances of which are related in this manner.

Acts vi. 8 — 15, " And Stephen, full of faith and power,
did great wonders and miracles among the people. Then
there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the
synagogue of the Libertines, disputing with Stephen. And
they were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by
which he spake. Then they suborned men which said, We
have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses,
and against God. And they stirred up the people, and the
elders, and the scribes, and came upon him, and caught him,
and brought him to the council ; and set up false witnesses,
which said, This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous
words against this holy place and the law. For we have
heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy
this place, and shall change the customs which Moses de
livered us. And all that sat in the council, looking stead
fastly on him, saw his face as it had been the face of an
angel. Then said the high priest, Are these things so?"
Stephen then made his speech, Acts vii. 1 — 53, " When
they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and
they gnashed on him with their teeth. But he being full of
the Holy Ghost, looked up steadfastly into heaven, and saw
the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of
God. Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped
their ears, and ran upon him with one accord, and cast him
out of the city, and stoned him, and the witnesses laid
down their clothes at a young man's feet, whose name was
Saul : and they stoned Stephen calling upon God, and say
ing, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit," ver. 54 — 60. To which
ought to be subjoined some expressions of Paul, in his
speech to the people at Jerusalem. Acts xxii. 20, " And
when the blood of thy martyr Stephen was shed, I also
was standing by and consenting to his death, and kept the
raiment of them that slew him."

Here we have a case, in many particulars different from
any we have yet met with. Here is not only a man brought
before the council, and witnesses heard ; but he is put to
death, by stoning, an ordinary Jewish punishment, without
any mention of his being prosecuted before a Roman magis
trate. And it has, in the conclusion, very much the appear
ance of a legal Jewish punishment ; for the witnesses seem
to have stoned him, or thrown the first stone at him.

•The State of the Jews in Judea. 61

The reader will be pleased now to recollect a previous
proposition, which was laid down at the beginning of this
inquiry ; namely, that the sacred historians are not account
able for the legality of the facts or proceedings which they
relate. Though this affair should be allowed to have all
the forms of a legal process, sentence, and punishment,
according to the Jewish law and customs, yet it does not
follow, that it was rightful, according to the constitution
they were then under. It is certain, that magistrates do
sometimes transgress the bounds of their authority, as well
as people commit disorders. We have a plain instance of
this at Philippi, Acts xv. where the magistrates commanded
Paul and Silas to be beaten and imprisoned. But in this
their sudden passion, they acted very irregularly, as they
were soon sensible themselves. And it is not impossible,
but the Jewish council at Jerusalem, in compliance with
their own malice, and the clamours of the people, might
pronounce a sentence that exceeded the bounds of their
authority, and execute it, before the Roman officer could
come in to prevent it.

This might be said, supposing there were here the com
plete form of a legal process, which I think there is not.
It is true, here were witnesses, and they bring their charge ;
but here is no sentence pronounced by the council, not one
word of it; nor does the high priest collect the opinions.
If this had been done, it is not likely that St. Luke would
have omitted it. In the account of the proceedings against our
Saviour, Matt. xxvi. 66, Mark xiv. 64, particular mention
is made of the high priest's asking the council their opinion,
" What think ye ?" and of the answer they made, " He is
guilty of death." And St. Luke, ch. xxii. 71, has given
the result of their debates : " And they said, What need we
any further witnesses ? for we ourselves have heard of his
own mouth." In the two cases already considered in this
period, St. Luke has informed us, not only of the accusa
tions against the prisoners and the defence they made, but
of the debates of the council after the prisoners had been
heard. These were ordered to go aside, there are debates,
and the final resolution is taken, and then the prisoners are
called in again, and the sentence is pronounced. Concern
ing Peter and John, see Acts iv. 15 — 18, of the apostles,
ch. v. 34—40.

And in the present case, after the witnesses, which they
had suborned, had delivered their accusations, " Then said
the high priest, Acts vii. 1, Are these things so?" That is,
he gave Stephen leave to make his defence. If after Ste-

62 Credibility of the Gospel History.

phen had done, the council had ordered him to go out ; or
if there had been any debates in the council concerning1
him, or the high priest had asked their opinion, and a
sentence had been pronounced, it is incredible these things
should have been omitted, as they are entirely. For what
St Luke says is, that having heard what Stephen said,
" they gnashed on him with their teeth :" and that " he
then looked up to heaven and said, — I see the heavens
opened, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God ; then
they cried out with a loud voice, and ran upon him with
one accord, and cast him out of the city, and stoned him."
This has all the appearance of a tumultuous proceeding of
the people, which the council, probably, had no inclination
to check, but were highly pleased with ; for of them I
understand those words, " When they heard these things,
they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with
their teeth ;" words which represent an ungoverned rage.

And, if I mistake not, Stephen is not convicted upon the
evidence of the witnesses : but upon his saying, " I see the
Son of man standing on the right hand of God, they ran
upon him with one accord."

His expressions they termed blasphemous ; and in that
case the Jewish people at this time seem to have made no
scruple at all of stoning a man immediately, without any
trial. There are so many instances of this in the Gospels,
that it seems needless to allege any in particular. See John
v. 17, 18. viii. 58, 59. x. 30—39.

And, as for the appearance of a legal punishment in these
particulars, that " they cast him out of the city, and stoned
him ; and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young
man's feet, whose name was Saul," I think, they cannot
prove, that this was not a tumultuous action : for even the
most unruly and disorderly multitude will oftentimes, in their
utmost extravagances, assume some formalities of a legal
procedure.

Notwithstanding this, there are some learned men who
think, this was not a sudden act of the people, but that it
was a punishment inflicted by the Jewish council. They
say, that it was not allowed for private persons to put any
man to death for any crime against their law, unless they
did it whilst the criminal was in the very act.a

a Sed uti bene observavit Seldenus, lib. x. de jure nat. et gent. cap. 4. ex
zeli judicio, supplicium capitale in ipso dum committebatur facinus duntaxat
momento, seu homini nr* auro0wp<jj deprehenso, a zelotis, id est, private zelo
ductis, infligi permittebatur. M. Wagenselius in Carm. Lip. Confut. p. 301.
and he alleges several passages from Jewish authors as proof of this, particu-

The State of the Jews in Judea. 63

But it may be questioned, whether the scheme of zealotism
at this time, was exactly the same which is represented in
the writings which these learned men quote. And though
it were, it is not impossible, but when such a principle was
countenanced, as that of the right of private persons to kill
men " in the act," they might sometimes go beyond the
bounds of that principle. And it is highly probable, that
the chief men of the Jewish nation, when their authority was
certainly under some restraints, might connive at the exor
bitances of this zeal. It is certain, we have in the Acts of
the Apostles, many instances of the Jews, in several places,
lying in wait for Paul's life ; not to catch him in the act of
what they might call blasphemy, or any other violation of their
law, but to kill him for facts done by him some time before.
It is not material to enquire, what this was owing to;
whether it ought to be called zealotism, or any thing else. It
is certain, these were common practices among them. One
thing, which they seem at this time to have thought the
proper object of this private zeal, is what they called blas
phemy. Now a criminal could not well be punished for
this in the very act. The words must first be out of a man's
mouth, before he could be guilty. Here were words spo
ken by Stephen, which they termed blasphemy : " Behold,
I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing at
the right hand of God." These words were spoken before
the council, and it is likely, before a good many other per
sons, who were present as witnesses and prosecutors, there
fore before ten or more persons. And Stephen was put to
death with all the expedition possible, that is, in the very
act, as near as could be. For it follows immediately, Acts
vii. 57, 58, " Then they cried out with a loud voice, and
stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord, and
cast him out of the city and stoned him."

Nor is the putting Stephen to death by stoning any proof,
that there had been a sentence pronounced, or that there
was any legal form observed in his death. For this was
common in their tumultuous attempts. Jesus having said
some things which gave them offence, John x. 31, " Then the
Jews took up stones again to stone him." He went on to
argue with them : ver. 33, They " answered him, saying,

larly from Maimonides. Quisquis paganam mulierem init. — Si istud propalam
fiat, hoc est, decem vel pluribus scelus inspectantibus, turn si zelotae hominem

adoriantur, et impigre trucident, laudantur. Veruntamen baud aliter licet

zelotae impetum in concubitores facere, quam si ipsi venereo operi sint intenti.

Quod si ab opere cessent, turn porro trucidare nefas est. Ibid. p. 301,

302.

64 Credibility of the Gospel History.

For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy."
See John xi. 7, 8. The stoning which Paul suffered at
Lystra was merely tumultuous. Acts xiv. 19, " And there
came thither certain Jews from Antioch and Iconium, who
persuaded the people, [T«? ox^ov?, the multitude,] and having
stoned Paul, drew him out of the city, supposing he had
been dead." Thus much for the case of Stephen.

4. It follows, Acts viii. 1, " And Saul was consenting* to his
death. And at that time there was a great persecution against
the church which was at Jerusalem, and they were all scat
tered abroad throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria,
except the apostles." Ver. 3, " As for Saul, he made
havock of the church, entering into every house, and haling
men and women, committed them to prison." Ch. ix. 1, 2,
" And Saul yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter
against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest,
and desired of him letters to Damascus, to the synagogues,
that if he found any of this way, whether they were men or
women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem."
When Ananias, at Damascus, was directed in a vision to go
to Saul, ch. ix. 13, 14, " he answered, Lord, I have heard
by many of this man, how much evil he has done to thy
saints at Jerusalem. And here he has authority from the
chief priests to bind all that call on thy name."

It must, I think, be supposed that Saul could not have
taken up any at Damascus, (which was subject to Aretas,)
by the authority of the council at Jerusalem, unless the
governor there gave him leave : and it is highly probable,
the correspondence between them was such as that he
would not refuse it.b

And St. Paul says of himself, in his speech to the people
of Jerusalem, Acts xxii. 4, 5, " I persecuted this way unto
the death, binding and delivering into prisons both men and
women, as also the high priest doth bear me witness, and
all the estate of the elders : from whom also I received let
ters unto the brethren, and went to Damascus, to bring
them which were there, bound unto Jerusalem, for to be
punished." Ver. 19, 20, " And I said, Lord, they know
that I imprisoned, and beat in every synagogue, them that
believed on thee : and when the blood of thy martyr Ste
phen was shed," &c.

In his speech to king Agrippa, Acts xxvi. 9 — 13, Paul
says, " Which thing I also did in Jerusalem, and many of
the saints did I shut up in prison, having received authority

b Vid. Acts ix. 23, 24. 2 Cor. xi. 32. et Cleric! Hist. Eccles. Ann. xxxi.
Num. 1.

The State of the Jews in Judea. 65

from the chief priests, and when they were put to death, I
gave my voice against them. And I punished them oft in
every synagogue, and compelled them to blaspheme ; and
being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them,
even unto strange cities. Whereupon as I went to .Damas
cus with authority and commission from the chief priests, at
mid-day, O king, I saw in the way a light from hea
ven," &c.

Here is a great variety of particulars : imprisoning", beat
ing in the synagogue, persecuting into strange cities, and
putting to death.

As for the persecuting into strange cities, it is not at all
surprising, that the Jews should have sufficient authority
and power in their own country, (though they had a Roman
governor amongst them,) to impose hardships upon the
followers of Christ that would make them leave Judea;
since, as has appeared from instances in the Acts of the
Apostles already alleged, they were able to drive them
from one place and city to another, in Greece, and several
parts of Asia.

The punishments inflicted in the synagogues must be
supposed inflicted by a mere Jewish authority, since they
had the free exercise of their religion.

The apostle says also expressly, that " many of the saints"
did he imprison by " authority from the chief priests."
When he says, he " persecuted this way unto the death," I
think, he expresses his aim and design ; and that in the
opposition he had made against the followers of Jesus, he
proposed to bring upon them not the lesser punishment
only of fines, whipping, or imprisonment, but death itself.

The case of the loss of life is that of Stephen, whose
death, he says, he was consenting to, and kept the raiment
of them that slew him. Besides this, in his speech to
Agrippa, he says, " and when they were put to death, I
gave my voice against them."

Here it ought to be observed, that it is not expressed by
what authority they were put to death. Though the sen
tences were pronounced and executed by the Roman
magistrate, (as in the case of our Saviour,) Saul might be
one who gave his voice against those who were so punished ;
as the people at Jerusalem did demand of Pilate, that
Jesus might be crucified. It is of some such act as this,
that Saul's giving his voice against them must be under
stood ; of witnessing against them, promoting a popular
clamour against them, or of approving, and consenting to
their condemnation and punishment. This is all that can

VOL. i. F

66 Credibility of the Gospel History.

be intended, because, whether they were put to death by
the authority of the sanhedrim, or of a Roman governor, it
cannot be supposed that Saul was one of the judges.

But I think, it may very well be questioned, whether in
these words Paul refers to any thing beside the death of
Stephen. This is the only person, whose death he has any
where expressly said he was concerned in. There is not
any one instance, beside the death of Stephen, hinted by St.
Luke : whereas if there had been any, it is very improbable
that he should have omitted them, since he has given so
particular an account of that of Stephen. It is very com
mon, in less exact, nay in almost all kinds of relations, to
use the plural number, where one only is meant. Thus St.
Matthew says, Matt, xxvii. 44, " that the thieves also which
were crucified with him, cast the same in his teeth."
Whereas it appears from St. Luke, (ch. xxiii. 39, 40,) that
only one of the malefactors, which were hanged, railed on
him, whilst he was rebuked by the other for it. Again,
Paul said unto them, [the keepers of the prison at Philippi,]
Acts xvi. 37, " They have beaten us openly uncondemned,
being Romans." And yet, most probably, Paul only was a
Roman and not Silas. And in no case could a plural num
ber be put for a singular more properly than here, where
the apostle, in his great humility, aggravates his former
blindness and madness. And the meaning of his words
here is no more than, when any one was put to death, I was
very forward in approving it.

Thus I think, that all which does evidently appear to
have been done by a proper authority of the chief priests
and council of the Jews, is imprisoning, scourging in the
synagogue, and in some public place, and harassing in such
a manner, as to oblige men to leave Judea. Stephen is put
to death, but it seems to have been in a tumultuous
manner.

However it must be allowed, that this was a time of very
heavy sufferings for the followers of Jesus. And one
would be apt to suppose, that for a good part of this period,
the Jews had no Roman governor residing among them ; or
if they had, that he connived at some disorders ; or else,
that their zeal rendered them so tumultuous, that he was
not able to keep things in good order amongst them.

There is one thing very observable, that for some time
before the end of this period, the disciples of Christ enjoyed
peace in Judea. Acts ix. 31, " Then had the churches rest
throughout all Judea, and Galilee, and Samaria." I hope
we shall be able to perceive, in some measure, the occasion

The State of the Jews in Judea. 67

of this, when we come to enquire what light foreign writers
g'ive us into this time.

VIII. We go on now to the third period, which is the
reign of Herod the king. The account we have of the
transactions in this period, is contained in the twelfth chap
ter of the Acts of the Apostles ; particularly from ver. 1, to
the 7th, and ver. 18, 19. There being no difficulty in it, I
need not transcribe it. Every order and act of Herod here
mentioned, his killing James with the sword, imprisoning
Peter with intent to bring him forth to the people, com
manding the keepers to be put to death, is an undeniable
proof of his sovereign authority at this time in Judea.

IX. The fourth period reaches from the reign of this
Herod, to the conclusion of the evangelical history.

The main thing which occurs here, is the treatment of
Paul in Judea, so far as there is any appearance of a legal
procedure. He being come to Jerusalem, and having been
persuaded to purify himself with others that had a vow, en
tered into the temple, Acts xxi. 26 — 34, " to signify the
accomplishment of the days of purification. — And when the
seven days were almost ended, the Jews which were of
Asia, when they saw him in the temple, stirred up all the
people, and laid hands on him, crying out, Men and brethren,
help ; this is the man that teacheth all men every where
against the people, and the law, and this place : and farther,
brought Greeks also into the temple, and has polluted this
holy place. (For they had seen before with him in the
city, Trophimus an Ephesian, whom they supposed that
Paul had brought into the temple.) And all the city was
moved, and the people ran together, and they took Paul,
and drew him out of the temple : and forthwith the doors
were shut. And as they went about to kill him, tidings
came to the chief captain of the band, that all Jerusalem
was in an uproar. Who immediately took soldiers and
centurions, and ran down unto them ; and when they saw
the chief captain, and the soldiers, they left beating of Paul,
Then the chief captain came near, and took him, and com
manded him to be bound with two chains, and demanded
who he was, and what he had done. — And when he could
not know the certainty for the tumult, he commanded him
to be carried into the castle." — But before he was led in,
with the chief captain's leave, he made a speech to the peo
ple in the Hebrew tongue; in which he relates at length,
that he had received directions in a trance, saying, Depart, for
I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles. The Jews, not
being able to contain themselves any longer, " lift up their

68 Credibility of the Gospel History.

voices, and said, Away with such a fellow from the earth :
for it is not tit that he should live. The chief captain then
commanded that he should be brought into the castle, and
bade that he should be examined by scourging," Acts xxii.
22, 23, 24. But Paul affirming that he was a Roman, the
centurion appointed to attend the torture, went and gave the
chief captain information of it. " On the morrow, because he
[the chief captain] would have known the certainty, where
fore he was accused of the Jews, he loosed him from his
bands, and commanded the chief priests and all their coun
cil to appear, and brought Paul down and set him before
them, ver. 30. And Paul earnestly beholding the council,
said, Men and brethren, I have lived in all g'ood conscience
before God until this day. And the high priest Ananias
commanded them that stood by to smite him on the mouth.
Then said Paul unto him, God shall smite thee, thou
whited wall : for sittest thou to judge me after the law, and
commandest me to be smitten contrary to the law ? And they
that stood by, said, Revilest thou God's high priest? Then
said Paul, I wist not, brethren, that he was the high priest :
for it is written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of
thy people," Acts xxiii. 1 — 5. A dissension arising in the
council, " the chief captain, fearing lest Paul should have
been pulled in pieces of them, commanded the soldiers to
go down, and to take him by force from among them, and
to bring him into the castle," ver. 9, 10.

The chief captain after this, being informed of a con
spiracy against Paul, sent him with a guard of two hundred
soldiers to Felix at Csesarea; who, when he had received
him, together with a letter from Lysias the chief captain,
told Paul, he would " hear him, when his accusers also
were come," ver. 35. " After five days, Ananias the high
priest descended with the elders and a certain orator named
Tertullus, who informed the governor against Paul," Acts
xxiv. 1 — 22. Felix having heard both sides, " deferred them,
and said, When Lysias the chief captain shall come down,
I will know the uttermost of your matter. — But after two
years, Porcius Festus came into Felix' room : and Felix,
willing to shew the Jews a pleasure, left Paul bound,"
ver. 27.

" Now when Festus was come into the province, after
three days he ascended from Csesarea to Jerusalem. Then
the high priest, and the chief of the Jews, informed him
against Paul, and besought him, and desired favour against
him, that he would send for him to Jerusalem, laying wait
in the way to kill him. But Festus answered, that Paul

The State of the Jews in Judea. 6$

should be kept at Csesarea ; and that he himself would de
part shortly thither. Let them therefore, said he, which
among you are able, go down with me, and accuse this
man, if there be any wickedness in him. Accordingly, he
went down to Ceesarea— and sitting on the judgment-seat —
the Jews which came down from Jerusalem — laid many
and grievous complaints against Paul, which they could
not prove. Paul answered for himself. But Festus willing
to do the Jews a pleasure, answered Paul and said, Wilt
thou go up to Jerusalem, and there be judged of these things
before me? Acts xxv. 1—9. Hereupon Paul appealed to
Cresar, and was carried to Rome.

The case is this : a man was like to have been killed in
a popular tumult at Jerusalem ; a Roman officer there
rescues him, takes him into his own hands, and lodges him
in a castle. Afterwards, that his prisoner might be safer,
he removes him to Ccesarea, the residence of the governor
before whom there are divers hearings. There was there
fore at this time a Roman governor in Judea, at first Felix,
who was succeeded by Festus. But beside them here is
also a Jewish council, which appears not void of authority.
This is the sum of the story. But here are divers par
ticulars to be reviewed. The pretence for seizing this man
at first is extremely complicated : " That he taught men
everywhere against the people, and the law, and this place,
and had brought Greeks into the temple, and polluted this
holy place. The whole charge, however, seems to have
been of a religious nature. This appears from divers testi
monies.

When Paul was brought before the council at Jerusalem
by Lysias, he " said, I am a pharisee, the son of a pharisee :
of the hope and resurrection of the dead am I called in
question," Acts xxiii. 6. This is a presumption the debates
then ran upon matters of religion. Lysias, in the letter he
sent with Paul to Felix, says : " I brought him forth into
their council, whom I perceived to be accused of questions
of their law," ver. 28, 29. Tertullus, whom Ananias took
along with him to Csesarea, tells Felix, " We have found
this man a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among
all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the
sect of the Nazarenes, who also hath gone about to profane
the temple," ch. xxiv. 5, 6. Here are hard words, and
some grievous charges thrown in to increase the account :
and nothing true, but that Paul was a Nazarene, as Paul
affirms, and seems to make out to Felix. " And they
neither found me in the temple disputing with any man,

70 Credibility of the Gospel History.

neither raising up the people, neither in the synagogue, nor
in the city : neither can they prove the things whereof they
accuse me. But this I confess to thee, that after the way
which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers,
ver. 12 — 14. And after certain days, when Felix came with
his wife Drusilla, he sent for Paul, and heard him concern
ing the faith in Christ," ver. 24. These new notions there
fore of Paul were the great subject of inquiry, to see
whether there was any thing dangerous or punishable in them.

Thus, before Festus at Csesarea, the Jews, which were
come down from Jerusalem, " laid many and grievous com
plaints against Paul, which they could not prove," ch. xxv. 7.
When Agrippa carne to salute Festus, Festus declared Paul's
cause unto the king-, and tells him, " Against whom when
the accusers stood up, they brought none accusation of such
things as I supposed ; but had certain questions against him
of their own superstition, and of one Jesus which was dead,
whom Paul affirmed to be alive," ver. 20. They might mix
other matters in their complaints, as men intent upon a point
are wont to do ; but Festus perceived no truth in their
charges, but what concerned their superstition or religion.
Festus afterwards brings forth Paul to Agrippa ; and Paul
having rehearsed the manner of his life from first to last,
before and since his conversion ; and having acquainted
them in particular with his commission from Christ to
preach the gospel ; after all was over, Agrippa said unto
Festus, " This man might have been set at liberty, if he had
not appealed unto Csesar," ch. xxvi. 15 — 30. Which words
show, Agrippa was convinced by what Paul said ; first, that
these principles of his were his only crime ; and secondly,
that notwithstanding the charges and pretences of the Jews,
Festus had a right to set Paul at liberty.

From all which particulars it appears, that all the evi
dence against Paul, was of facts that concerned the Jewish
religion, or the security of their worship : and yet we find,
that Felix and Festus were the judges of this prisoner, in
this cause : all parties acknowledge it.

The Jews seem to have owned it by their conduct : for
Ananias went down to Csesarea with Tertullus, and accused
Paul there before Felix, Acts xxv. 6, 7. And when Festus
came into the province, they went to Ceesarea again, and
pleaded against Paul. Festus, speaking of Paul to Agrippa,
says, about whom " when I was at Jerusalem, the chief
priests and the elders of the Jews informed me, desiring to
have judgment against him," ver. 15. And again, " Ye see
this man, about whom all the multitude of the Jews have

The State of the Jews in Judea. 71

dealt with me, both at Jerusalem, and also here, crying1,
that he ought not to live any longer," ver. 24.

Paul plainly acknowledges them to be so. " Then Paul,
after that the governor had beckoned to him to speak,
answered for himself: Forasmuch as I know that thou hast
been of many years a judge unto this nation, I do the more
cheerfully answer for myself," ch. xxiv. 10. And that his
cause belonged to the Roman jurisdiction, he declared
farther by his appeal at last to Caesar.

These governors evidently claim the right of judgment.
When Paul was first delivered to Felix at Caesarea, " Felix
said unto him, I will hear thee, when thine accusers also
are come," ch. xxiii. 35. And after he had heard the
accusers and Paul the prisoner in judgment, he deferred
them, and said, When Lysias the chief captain shall come
down, I will know the uttermost of your matter," ch. xxiv.
22. When Festus went first to Jerusalem, after he came
into the province, " the high priest and chief of the Jews
desired favour against him, [Paul,] that he would send for
him to Jerusalem. But Festus answered, that Paul should
be kept at Caesarea, and that he himself would depart
shortly thither. Let them therefore, said he, which among
you are able, go down with me, and accuse this man, if
there be any wickedness in him," ch. xxv. 2 — 5. Paul
having pleaded there before him, " Festus, willing to do the
Jews a pleasure, answered Paul, and said, Wilt thou go up
to Jerusalem, and there be judged of these things before
me ?"ver. 9.

It ought to be observed likewise, that the Jews are all
styled accusers only : the places are too many to be in
stanced in, and the reader cannot but recollect divers of
them.

X. But though this affair, thus stated, favours much the
supposition, that the Jews had not now the power of life and
death, yet there are some difficulties that deserve considera
tion.

1. It may be thought, that the Jews had at this time the
power of life and death, according to the constitution they
were then under, but that Lysias had acted irregularly in
taking Paul out of the Jewish hands, and that the governors
likewise acted arbitrarily in supporting Lysias. This ob
jection is founded upon what Tertullus says to Felix in his
pleading before him : " For we have found this man a pes
tilent fellow, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes,
who also has gone about to profane the temple : whom we
took, and would have judged according to our law. But

Credibility of the Gospel History.

the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great vio
lence took him out of our hands," Acts xxiv. 5—7.

In answer to this, it is not easy to say, what we ought to
understand by those words, "whom we would have judged
according to our law." Perhaps he may be supposed by
some to say, that Paul having, beside other crimes, polluted
the temple, by bringing heathens and uncircumcised per
sons into it, or beyond the bounds which were prescribed
to such, we were going for this last offence to put him to
death immediately. Titus in an expostulatory speech to
the Jews, toward the conclusion of the siege of Jerusalem,
says, ' Did not you erect pillars there at certain distances,
' with inscriptions in Greek and Latin, forbidding any to
6 pass those bounds? and did not we give you leave to kill
' any man that passed them, though he were a Roman T c
But though it could be supposed, that here was some refer
ence to this matter, yet certainly they had no right by
virtue of this permission, to put Paul to death. This grant
only empowered them to kill strangers that passed those
limits, whereas Paul was a Jew. So that they acted irre
gularly in attempting to kill him on this account.

But possibly this man here attempted to misrepresent the
fact, and pretended, that they were not going to kill Paul,
but only to inflict one of those lesser punishments for the
breach of their laws, which they had a right to inflict.
And indeed I think, there is but little regard to be had to
what Tertullus says. It seems plain to rne, that he endea
vours to impose upon the governor. Their attempt upon
Paul was a mere tumult, as appears from St. Luke's history
of it, Acts xxi. 27 — 31. And if we had not any particular
account of that first action of the Jews at Jerusalem, yet
Paul confuted, or invalidated all this part of Tertullus's
speech, by that one observation in his defence and reply :
" Whereupon certain Jews from Asia found me purified in
the temple, neither with multitude nor with tumult : who
ought to have been here before thee, and object, if they had
ought against me," ch. xxiv. 18, 19. The non-appearance
of these persons is a proof, that what they had done was
not legal, and could not be justified : and doubtless Felix
so understood it.

As for the charge, which Tertullus brings against Lysias,
" that he came upon us, and with great violence took him
out of our hands," this is undoubtedly of a piece with what
went before. He that could call that tumultuous attempt

avaiptiv
tj. Jos. de Bell. lib. 6. c. ii. sect. 4.

The State of the Jews in Judea. 73

upon Paul's life, judging- him according to their law, might
say any thing. Lysias sustains so excellent a character in
every other part of this narration, that it is not easy to sup
pose he had acted irregularly in this action. He paid such
a regard to the disposition of the Jewish people against
Paul, as to bind him with two chains, as soon as he had got
him into his possession. Not being able to find the truth
from the different accounts given him, he ordered Paul to be
examined by scourging. As soon as he knew that he was a
Roman, he desisted from that method of inquiry. That he
might know the certainty, he summoned a council at Jeru
salem, brought Paul down to them, and had the goodness
to unbind him whilst he pleaded. As soon as he was in
formed of a clandestine conspiracy against Paul, he pru
dently contrives to send him under a strong guard to
Ceesarea, where he might be safe. In his letter to Felix,
he gives a most just account of the whole affair, and of his
own conduct in particular. " This man was taken of the
Jews, and should have been killed by them ; then came I
with an army, and rescued him." And though I pass by
many advantageous parts of his character, I must not omit
his goodness, or exactness at least, in not consigning this
prisoner to Felix without adding, beside his innocence, that
he was a Roman.

These things are sufficient to assure us, that Lysias had a
strict regard to justice, and the form of government then
established in Judea ; and that, in rescuing Paul from a
mob, he had acted nothing but the part of a faithful and
vigilant commander.

2. Farther, those words of St. Paul may create some
difficulty, which we have in his answer to Festus's proposal of
his going to be judged at Jerusalem: — " But if there be
none of these things whereof these accuse me, no man may
deliver me unto them," ch. xxv. 11. Whereby some may
apprehend, that Paul was afraid Festus would give the
cause out of his own hands, and permit the Jewish council
to try him for his life.

But this cannot be the intention of Paul. For Festus's
proposal was, " Wilt thou go up to Jerusalem, and there be
judged of these things before me? "

Nor, secondly, is this the meaning of this phrase, OvSei*
pe Bwa-rai aimn<? ^apiaaadai. The meaning is, no man may
condemn me to death to please the Jews. Paul was afraid,
that if he was carried up to Jerusalem, Festus might be
induced by the whole weight of the Jewish people there to

74 Credibility of the Gospel History.

condemn him, though innocent. This is the common mean
ing" of this word in like cases, when a judge is induced to de
part from the merits of a cause, or from his own judgment, and
to pronounce a sentence to gratify other people. It is used
in a good and in a bad sense. It is used in a good sense by
Dionysius of Halicarnassus, who says, Amulius gave (or
delivered) Rhea Silvia to his daughter: that is, granted
Rhea her life at the request of his daughter :d and by Jo-
sephus, for thus he addresseth himself to Justus of Tiberias,
* And did not Agrippa, when he had ordered you to be put
' to death, grant [or deliver] your life to his sister Bernice,6
4 when she earnestly requested it ?'

It is also used in a bad sense. Thus the Jewish ambas
sadors, in the complaints they made to Augustus at Rome,
of Herod the Great's government, after his death, say, ' He
6 gave (or delivered) the blood of Judea to foreign people.' f
This, therefore, is what Paul says, that since he was inno
cent, no man might condemn him to please others, no,
not a whole nation.

3. Still some may have a suspicion, that if this was not a
cause within the jurisdiction of the Jews, the reason might
be, that the prisoner concerned was a Roman citizen : and
they may think, such a suspicion may be founded upon
what Lysias says in his letter to Felix : " This man was
taken of the Jews, and should have been killed of them :
then came I with an army, and rescued him, having under
stood that he was a Roman," Acts xxiii. 27.

In answer to this, some learned men place a full point
after rescued him. And join these last words, not with
what goes before them, but with what follows, and translate
them thus : Having understood that he was a Roman citizen,
and being desirous to know the cause wherefore they

d lE,TrtK\a(r6r]vai de TOV A/zsXtov eig TSTO, ueerevso^f rrjg SvyaTpoq %apiaa(T-
Qai TTJV av&tyiav avrtf rjffav $£ (Ti>vrpo0oi, Kai rjXiKiav t%&ffai Tr\v avnjv,
'

Tf aXXr/Xa£ wf afoX^a^' ^apt^o/ievov &v ravry TOV A.fju$\iov. p. 63. v.
14. edit. Huds. e Kat airoQavuv <re KeXevaag, a?ra£ ry adt\<j)y BtpviKy TroXXa
dtJlGuay, Tr}v GUTripiav exaoiaaTo. Joseph, in Vit. Cap. 65. p. 839. v. 1. It
is used by him in a good sense again, xM9lG ™v AyptTTTrp \a$iGQtvruv° de
B. J. lib. 3. cap. ult. sub. fin. ' Kae TO TTJQ IsSaiac; aifia Kt^apiaQca

roig e?w0fv SrjfioiQt de Bell. lib. 2. cap. 6. sect. 2. jam citat. a Grot, in loc. I
subjoin a beautitul sentence of Socrates in Plato, in which he says, Nor is a
judge appointed to give away right and justice to favour or entreaty, but to
judge according to the laws. On yap CTTI rery KaBijrai 6 ^i/caT/yf trri rip
Ka.To.'xapi&oQa.i ra SiKaia, aXX' f TTI r<£> Kpiveiv Tavra KCLI O^M^OKEV s %apitiG9at
OIQ av doKy avr(^), aXXa SucaGiiv Kara TSQ voju«£. Apol. Socr. p. 35. C. edit.
Serran. There is another example in Eus. H. E. 1. v. p. 163. Kai yap KO.I TOV
ArraXov Tip o^Xy \apiC,G^i(.voq 6 riyefj,(i)v.

The State of the Jews in Judea. 75

accused him, I brought him forth to the council.^ But the
original will not admit of this interpretation.11

1 answer, therefore, that this cannot be the meaning of
Lysias, that having understood he was a Roman, he then
came upon them and rescued him ; because this was not
the fact, as St. Luke himself, who has given us this letter,
relates it. Lysias did not know that Paul was a Roman,
till after he had put him into the castle, and ordered him to
be there examined by scourging', Acts xxiii. 26, 27. Nor
do the words necessarily imply, that he knew this before he
had taken him out of the Jewish hands. They import no
more than this, as Grotius has observed ; then came I with
an army and rescued him, and I have understood that he is
a Roman.1

And it appears to me very observable, that in the course
of this long' affair in Judea, St. Paul has never insisted
upon the privilege of a citizen, but in that one case, of
the chief captain's ordering him to be examined by scourg
ing.

However, if any are inclined to suspect, that Paul's
being a Roman citizen might exempt him from the juris
diction of the Jews, then this particular case must be set
aside ; and we have in it no proof, one way or other, what
was the power of the Jewish council over their own people
in their own country.

But though we set aside all the proceedings relating to
Paul, after he was known to be a Roman citizen, yet it
seems to me, that we have some particulars mentioned in this
narration which show the Jewish magistrates had not the
supreme government in Judea, no, not in religious matters.

The rescue of Paul by Lysias is one part of this story.
The Jews were about to kill him. " The chief captain,
hearing of the uproar, immediately took soldiers and centu
rions, and ran down to them. — Then the chief captain came
near and took him," Acts xxi. 31 — 38. He did not then
know who, or what Paul was : he might have been a mere
Jew for ought he knew.

And I think that Paul's defence before Felix, in answer

* Ayant apris qu'il est citoyen Remain, et voulant savoir quel etoit le
crime, dorit ils Taccusoient, je 1'avois mene devant leur sanhedrim. Nouv.
Testament tradiiit par Mr. Le Clerc. h For then the words would

have been p,aOwv dt on Pw/zouo£ £<ri KO.I (3s\ofj.evog. Whereas they are, \LaQuv
& 6 P. «• /SaXojutvog c)£ yvuvai, K. T. \. I think, that the & following
(3s\of^vog and not [taOuv, shows Mr. Le Clerc's interpretation is not just.

1 Aoristus hie nullum certum tempus designat j et tantum valet quantum
KCLI spaOov, et cognoveram. Grot, in loc.

76 Credibility of the Gospel History.

to Tertullus, is remarkable : " Forasmuch as I know, that
thou hast been of many years a judge unto this nation, I do
the more cheerfully answer for myself," Acts xxiv. 10.
This argument had been ridiculous, if such cases as these
had never come before Felix, and did not belong to him.
All the particulars insisted on from ver. 11> to 21, have
some regard to religion and the security of it. " They
neither found me in the temple disputing with any man," —
Felix was a judge unto this nation in these causes. Nor
does Paul speak of himself as a Roman, but as a Jew.
" Now after many years I came to bring alms to my nation,
and offerings," ver. 17.

And if all this do not amount to a proof, that causes of a
religious nature belonged to the Roman jurisdiction, yet
certainly here is sufficient to prove, that the Romans had
supreme power over the Jews in civil matters, or else they
had no power at all. For, I presume, no man will suppose,
that Felix and Festus were sent to govern Romans and
Greeks only in Judea. I need not remind the reader of all
the particulars that have already passed before us. But he
cannot forget the acknowledgment St. Paul makes of Felix
being judge unto that nation, nor the Roman garrison at
Jerusalem, nor the title of governor given to Felix and
Festus, nor what Tertullus says : " Seeing that by thee we
enjoy great quietness, and that very worthy deeds are done
unto this nation by thy providence, we accept it always,
most noble Felix, with all thankfulness," Acts xxiv. 23.
And of Lysias, an officer plainly inferior to Felix, it is
said, that " because he would have known the certainty,
wherefore he [Paul] was accused of the Jews, he com
manded the chief priests and all their council to appear"
ch. xxii. 30.

This is what we can collect from the sacred writers, con
cerning the state of Judea, at the time of their history.

XL I proceed now to show their agreement with other
ancient writers. The first and last periods are evidently of
the same kind; and therefore I shall endeavour jointly to
confirm what we have met with concerning them.

During the whole first period, Pontius Pilate was go
vernor of Judea : and all we have taken notice of in the
fourth or last period happened under Felix, or Porcius
Festus, likewise Roman governors of Judea. That Judea
was, at the times the evangelists speak of, under the go
vernment of these Roman officers, has been shown already,
or will be shown in other parts of this work. This being
taken for granted, we are now only to inquire, whether the

The State of the Jews in Judca. 77

evangelists appear to have had a just idea of the power
which these governors had in this country.
In order to determine this, I shall

1. Set down the opinions of divers Roman lawyers con
cerning the power of the presidents of provinces.

2. I shall give some passages of ancient writers relating
to the state of Judea in particular.

3. Some passages of ancient writers concerning the state
of people in other provinces.

1. I shall set down the opinions of divers Roman lawyers
concerning the power of the presidents of provinces.

TJlpian, who flourished in the very beginning of the third
century of the Christian sera says, * It is the duty of a good

* and vigilant president to see to it, that his province be
' peaceable and quiet. — And that he ought to make diligent
' search after sacrilegious persons, robbers, menstealers,

* and thieves, and to punish every one according to his
< guilt.' k

The same celebrated lawyer says, * They who govern

* whole provinces have the right of the sword, and the power

* of sending to the mines.'1

And the right of the sword, or power of the sword, ap
pears from another passage of the same lawyer to be the
power of punishing malefactors."1

Again, he says, 4 The president of a province hath the
' highest authority in his province next to the emperor.' u

Hermogenianus says, ' Governors and presidents of pro-
4 vinces have the cognizance of all causes, which belong to
' the prefect of the city, or the prefect of the prsetorium,
' and the consuls, and praetors, and other magistrates at
' Rome.'0

And Marcianus : ' All affairs in the provinces, which at
Rome are under the jurisdiction of several judges, do be
long to the presidents.'?

k Congruit bono et gravi praesidi curare, ut pacata atque quicta provincia
sit, quam regit : — Nam et sacrileges, latrones, plagiaries, lures conquirere
debet : et prout quisque deliquerit, in eum animadvertere. L. 13. pr. ff. de
Off. Frees. l Qui universas provincias regunt, jus gladii habent : et

in metallum dandi potestas eis permissa est. L. 6. sect. 8. ff. eod.

m Imperium aut menim [est] aut mixtum est. Merum est imperium, habere
gladii potestatem ad animadvertendos facinorosos homines, quod etiam
potestas appellatur. Mixtum est imperium, cui etiam jurisdictio inest, quod in
danda bonorum possessione consistit. L. 3. ff. de Jurisd. n Prseses

provincial majus imperium in ea provincia habet omnibus post principem.
L. 4. ff. de Off. Praes. ° Ex omnibus causis, de quibus vel Praefectus

urbi, vel Praefectus praetorio, itemque Consules et Praetores, caeterique Romae
cognoscunt, Correctorum et Praesidum provinciarum est notio. L. 10. ff. eod.

p Omnia enim provincialia desideria, quae Romae varies judices habent, ad

78 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Ul plan says, ' No one can transfer to another the power
6 of the sword, which has been committed to himself, nor the

* right of any other punishment/ 1

Marcianus says, ' Adrian wrote thus to Julius Secundus :

* It has already been enjoined by rescripts, that credit is riot
' to be given to the epistles of those, who send persons to
' the presidents as condemned.' ' The same rule extends
4 to the peace-officers. — Therefore they who are sent with a

* bill [or information] are to be re-heard, although they are
' sent with a letter, or are brought by the peace-officers.'1"

This illustrates several particulars in the causes we have
been considering in the New Testament. Though the Jew
ish council, upon their examination of Jesus, pronounced
him to be " guilty of death," Matt. xxvi. 66, and when
they came before Pilate, said, " If he were not a malefactor,
we would not have delivered him up unto thee," John xviii.
30 ; yet Pilate gave the cause a fresh hearing, and did not
at all rely upon the information of the council. And Paul
was heard again before Felix, though Lysias sent him with
a letter, in which he informed the governor of his inno
cence. Nor did Lysias expect, that Felix should rely upon
the hearing he had given the cause, and the sentence he
gave concerning it, but referred the issue to Felix.

Ulpian says, ' The magistrates of municipal places may
6 not punish a slave (with death) : but the inflicting lesser
' penalties is not to be denied them.'8

officium Praasidum pertinent. L. ILff. eod. Tit. To which maybe sub
joined from Proculus : Sed licet is qui provinciae praeest, omnium Romae
magistratuum vice et officio fungi debeat, non tarn spectandum est, quid Romae
facturn sit, quam quid fieri debeat. L. 12. eod. 1 Solent etiam custo-

diarum cognitionem mandare legatis : scilicet, ut praeauditas custodias ad se
remittant, ut innocentem liberet: Sed hoc genus mandati extraordinarium
est: nee enim potest quis gladii potestatem sibi datam, vel cujus alterius
coercitionis ad alium transferre. L. 6. pr._ff. de Officio Proconsulis et Legati.
Papinianus says the same thing : Qui mandatam jurisdictionem suscepit, pro-
prium nihil habet : sed [et] ejus, qui mandavit, jurisdictione utitur. Verum
est enim more majorem jurisdictionem quidem transferri, sed merum imperium,
quod lege datur, non posse transire : quare nemo dicit, animadversionem lega-
tum proconsulis habere mandata jurisdictione. L. 1. sect. 1. if. de Officio
ejus cui mandat. est Jurisd. r Divus Hadrianus Julio Secundo ita

rescripsit : * Et alias rescriptum est, non esse utique epistolis eorum credendum,
' qui quasi damnatos ad praesidem remiserint.' Idem de irenarchis praeceptum

est : quia non omnes ex fide bona elogia scribere compertum est. Igitur,

qui cum elogio mittuntur, ex integro audiendi sunt, etsi per literas missi fuerint,
vel etiam per irenarchas perducti. L. 6. pr. et sect. 1. if. de Custodia et Ex-
hibitione reorum. s Magistratibus municipalibus supplicium a servo

sumere non licet : modica autem castigatio non est denegarida. L. 12. if. de
Jurisdictione. What Paulus says agreeth herewith : Ea, quae magis imperil
sunt, quam jurisdictions, magistratus municipalis facere non potest. L. 26.
if. Ad municip. et de incolis

The State of the Jews in Judea. 79

Municipia1 were towns, or cities, which had the citizen
ship of Rome bestowed upon them, and yet still lived ac
cording to their own laws and constitutions. In which they
differed from colonies, which were governed by the Roman
laws. u

I take this to decide the matter fully. The Jews lived
according to their own laws, as municipal people did : but
then, if these last, who were Roman citizens, had not the
right of punishing a slave with death, certainly the Jews
had not, whilst under the Roman government.

2. I shall now proceed to some passages of ancient writ
ers, that particularly concern the state of Judea about this
time.

Archelaus, Herod's son, being banished by Augustus,
A. D. 6 or 7, Judea was put under the government of
Roman officers sent from Rome. Of this affair Josephus, in
the Jewish war, speaks in these words : * The dominion of
' Archelaus being reduced to a province, Coponius, a person
' of the equestrian order among the Romans, is sent thither
' invested by Caesar with the power of life and death.' v

Speaking of this same revolution in his Antiquities, he
says, * In the mean time Cyrenius, a senator — came into
* Syria — being sent thither by Caesar, as judge of that
' nation, and censor of their estates. And Coponius, a per-
4 son of the equestrian rank, is sent with him to govern the
' Jews with supreme authority : Cyrenius also came into
' Judea, it being annexed to the province of Syria.' w

When St. Luke mentions Festus's arrival into the pro
vince,75^ namely, of Judea, Acts xxv. 1, he uses the same
word that Josephus does, when he says, that Archelaus's
dominion was reduced to a province. And when St. Paul
stiles Felix the judge unto thaU nation, he uses a phrase
equivalent to that, by which Josephus describes the autho
rity with which Cyrenius was sent into Syria ; namely, as
judge of that people, or to administer justice among them.

As Cyrenius came at this time into Judea, and made an

1 Municipes ergo sunt cives Roman! ex municipiis, legibus suis et suo jure
utentes. A. Gell. Lib. xiii. cap. 13. vid. et Fest. voc. Municipes, et
Municipium. u Et jura institutaque omnia populi Romani, non sui

imperii habent. A. Gell. ubi supra. v Trje $e Apx^Xaa xwpae «e

67rapxtav 7r£piypa0£i<T)7£, ITTLT^OTTOQ TIQ nnriKrjQ Trapa Pw/iaicf£ ra^twf KWTTW-
vio£ 7rf/i7rcrai, ft£XPl rs KTeivfiv \af3a)v Trapa rs Ka«rapo£ i^aGiav' Jos. de B.
lib. ii. cap. viii. sect. 1. w Kvprjmog Se ETTI Zvpiae Trapjv, VTTO

Kaicrapog SIKOIO^OTJJQ rs eBva a7Tf^a\p,evog KwTramof re avrtp

TTf/iTrerat, rayjwarof ran/ nnrtuv rj-yr]<Top,£Vog IsSaioJV ry fTri iraaiv
Traprjv de Kai TLvpijvioq tiq TTJV Indaiwv TrpoaOrjKrjv rr\c, Svpm t
Antiq. lib. xviii. cap. 1. sect. 1. x 3>»^o£ sv sirtpas ry

r<t> £0j'« Turift. Acts xxiv. 10.

80 Credibility of the Gospel History.

assessment there, so the Jews continued, whilst a Roman
province, to pay tribute to the emperor. Tacitus informs
us, that in the third of Tiberius, A. D. 17, the Jews pre
sented a petition to Tiberius for an abatement of their tri
bute.2 And Agrippa the younger, A. D. 66, tells the Jews
that the Alexandrians paid the Romans more tribute in a
month than they did in a year.a

Philo has given a long1 representation of Pilate's govern
ment, in the complaints which the Jews made to Pilate,
upon his dedicating shields at Jerusalem. They tell him,
' It was not the will of Tiberius, that any of their laws and

* customs should be violated. b And Pilate was afraid that
' if they should send an embassy to Rome, they would dis-
' cover to the emperor the many crimes of his administration,
' his taking of bribes, his extortions, his murders of inno-
6 cent and uncondemned persons, and other cruelties/0
Here are the tokens of civil power, but much abused.

In Josephus there are many instances of the authority of
Felix and Festus, who punished not only bands of robbers,
but those also that got together under religious pretences,
though with designs of making innovations in the govern
ment. d And these facts Josephus relates without any marks
of censure ; whereas, when these, or any other of the govern
ors committed any acts of violence and injustice, he never
fails to make reflections upon them.

I shall transcribe here but one passage concerning an
action of Albinus, successor of Porcius Festus, just before he
left the province. But when Albinus6 heard that Gessius
Florus was ' coming to succeed him, being desirous to
' seem to do something to gratify the people of Jerusalem ;

* having inquired into the case of all that were in prison,
' he gave orders for the putting to death all that were

* manifestly guilty of capital crimes ; but set at liberty all

z Et provinciae Syria atque Judaea, sessae oneribus, diminutionem tributi
orabant. Ann. lib. ii. cap. 42. * a Ta tit eviavais Trap' fyiwv <f>opa

KctO' eva [irjva TT\IOV Pa>/iaioif Trape^ei* De B. J. lib. ii. cap. 16. p. 1088. v.
45. b Tifltpiog &Btv t9eXei TWV rj/urfpwv Ka.TaXvt<r9ai' Philo de

legat. ad Cai. p. 1034. B. c Taro paXis-a avrov

KaradeHravra ^.rj ry OVTI TrptcrfievvaiJitvoi, Kai Trjg aXXqg avrs
£-££\£y£w<n Tag dwpo$o»aaf, Tag i>/3p«£, Tag apTrayaf, Tag auciag, — Tag
Kai tTraXXrjX&g Qovsg — Sie£e\9ovTtg' ib. ibid. C. d See Antiq. lib. xx.

cap. 7. sect. 6. 10. de Bell. lib. ii. cap. 13. e Qg St rjicsfftv AXfiivog

fiiadoxov avTQ Ffcrcriov <&Xwpov afyiKvuaQai, /feXo/ifvof SoKtiv Totg l
Taig 7rap£tr^;r/(70ai, 7rpo(7ayaywv Tsg ^fcr^ta;rac> oaoi rjffav airaiv
Sravtiv a%ioi, T&T8g TTpofftTa^ev avaipf.9r]vai' Tsg ^£ £<c fiiK^ag Kai Trjg
aiTiag eig Tt]v fipicTrjv KaTaTtOtvTag, %prjfj,aTa Xajjiflavujv avTog aTteXvf'
OVTWQ, rj ptv (pvXaKtj TOJV $£<rjuwra>j> tKaOap9t]t ri %wpa de
Antiq. 20. cap. 8. sect. 5.

The State of the Jews in Judea. 81

* those who had been imprisoned for lesser offences, having

* first received a sum of money. Thus the prisons were

* emptied, and the country was filled with robbers.' This
is a proof, that Albinus had the supreme power in all
offences. These must be Jewish prisoners, or the releas
ing them had been no obligation upon the people of Jeru
salem.

But though these procurators acted with the highest au
thority under the emperor, yet the Jews had a senate and
magistrate ; as appears undeniably from a letter of Claudi
us, sent to them in answer to a petition he had received
from them; which letter was written, A. D. 45, and is thus
directed ; ' To the magistrates of Jerusalem, to the council,
4 the people, and the whole nation of the Jews, greeting/ f
Josephus often makes mention of the magistrates and chief
men of Jerusalem. % When the war was just breaking out
between them and the Romans, they being very uneasy
under the government of their procurator Florus, Josephus
says, that the ' high priests of the Jews, and the chief men,

* and the council, waited upon Agrippa, to inform him of the

* state of their affairs.'11

We have a proof of their power of beating or whipping,
in the punishment of Jesus the Son of Ananus ; who at the
feast of tabernacles, four years before the war, began his
lamentable cry : ; A voice against Jerusalem, a voice against
6 the temple. He went through all the streets of the city,
4 crying thus day and night. Some of the people, being
4 uneasy, at so ill boding' a sound, take the man up and

* have him beaten most severely." But he still continuing
his cry ; * The magistrates thinking the man must be under

* some more than ordinary impulse, as indeed he was, bring

* him to the Roman president. He having examined and
1 whipped him again, dismissed him as a madman.''

This shows, the magistrates of Jerusalem could order a
whipping: but whether their carrying the man after that to
the Roman procurator amounts to a proof, that they could

f leooffoXvpiTtoiv crpx8<n> (BaXy, drjfj-y, Iscaiuv iravri t9vei, ^aioav. Antiq.
lib. xx. cap. 1. sect. 2. * Apxovree TOJV ItooaoXv^v. p. 1073.

28. et alibi passim. h Ej/Oa mi Isoaiuv 01 re apxitp«£ a/j,a TOIQ

CVVO.TOIG, KO.I r) fiaXtj iraprjv deZisnevrj TOV fiainXta. De Bell. lib. ii. cap. 16.
sect. 2. * TCJV d' £7ri<T»/jLtwv TIVZQ drjfjiOTOJV, ayavaKTrjaavTtq TTOOC TO

Kaicotyrjuov, <TvXXa[Jif3av8<Ti TOV avQo^7rovy KO.I TroXXaiQ aua£ovrai TrXrjyatQ —
vofiiaavTtQ £' 01 apxovTeg, OTrtp rjv, ^ai^oviMTtoov uvai TO Kivr^ia TH avdpog,
avaysniv avTov CTTI TOV Traoa PdJfiaioiQ ETrap^ov, tvQa jitaTi^i /j£%pie OTEWV
^aivoj«£vog, ou0' uctTtvaev, &T tdaicpvatv — TOV 8' CTTI ry TroXfi Srprjvov eipwv a
SieXtiirt, pfxpi KaTayvsQ paviav, 6 AXfiivo^ airtXvfftv O.VTOV. De B. J. lib.
vi. c. 5. sect. 3.

VOL. I. O

B2 Credibility of the Gospel History .

not inflict any heavier punishment, I must leave to the read
er's consideration.

The Jews had likewise senates in some other cities, beside
Jerusalem, which senates had also the power of imprisoning*.
Josephus thus characterizes Albinus's government. ' For
' sums of money, paid by relations, he set at liberty thieves

* and robbers, which had been imprisoned by the senate of
' any place, or by the former procurators.'1*

And now I reckon we have gxme over the several in
stances of the Jews' power and authority. The nature of the
Roman government in Judea, and the extent of the Jewish
privileges under that government, may however be farther
illustrated by two or three other passages. When Herod
the Great was dead, the Jews having been oppressed by
him, and being desirous to be no longer subject to his
family, sent an embassy to Augustus. The substance of
their petition presented to the emperor, Josephus says, was
this, ' That they might no longer continue in the state of a
' kingdom, but might be annexed to Syria, and be governed

* by praetors sent from thence.'1 Thus he represents it in his
Antiquities. In his Jewish War he expresses it thus :
1 Ambassadors were sent away to obtain a right of living
' according to their own laws.'m These two passages laid
together assure us, their petition was, that they might be
governed by Roman officers according to their own laws.

And Josephus says, that after the death of Herod Agrippa,

* Claudius made Judea a province again, and sent

* Cuspius Fadus to be procurator, and afterwards Tiberius
' Alexander. They making no alterations in the laics and
' customs of the country., kept the nation in peace.'"

It is likewise worth while to place here a part of the
speech, which Agrippa the younger made to the people at
Jerusalem, to dissuade them from entering into war with
the Romans. ' I know very well,' says he, * that many

* make loud complaints of the oppressions of the procura-
' tors, and run out into the praises of liberty. Before I come
4 therefore to consider the prospect of success in this your

k AXXa KO.I TSQ €7ri \y;f.iq, dedefjievsg, VTTO rr]£ Trap' £Ka<roi£ $«X»/f, t} TWV
tTrirpoTrwv aTT£\vrps Toig ffvyytvwi. De Bell. lib. ii. cap. 14.

sect. 1. ! Hv de Kt$a\aiov avrotg rrjg a£tw<r£Wf, (3a(nXf.iaQ \itv Kai

Toioivdt ap%a>v cnrriXXaxQai, TrpoaOrjKrjv ds Svpiae yeyovorag viroracrvtaOai rot£
uceiee 7re/t7ro/«vot€ <rpari;yoie. Antiq. lib. xvii; cap. 13. sect. 1.

m np£<r/3a£ tZe\ii\vQti<rav rrtpt rr)Q r« tQvsg avrovofjuag. De B. lib. ii.
cap. 6. sect. 1. n HaXtv rag (3affi\iectQ KXavdiog £7rap%iai> Troirjaag

(TrirpOTTOv TTC/nTTfi K&VTTiov <ba$ov, cTTEtra Tt/3fptov A\t%av8poV 01, pqdtv
TrapaKiv&VTtQ ra>v Trarpiwv t0wv, fv fipqvy TO tQvoQ $i((j)V\a%av' De BelL
lib. ii. cap. 11. sect. 6.

The State of the Jews in Judea. 83

* design by showing* you what is your strength, and what

* is theirs with whom you are about to contend, I would
' first distinguish the pretences, which are strangely con-
' nected by some. For if you would revenge those who do
' you wrong, why do you talk of liberty ? But if you judge

* servitude intolerable, complaints of the governors are
4 superfluous. For though they be ever so just and mode-

* rate in their government, the scandal of subjection (or
'servitude) remains.'0 This is a proof, that whilst they had
a Roman governor in their country, no sober men among
them would pretend they were a free people.

.And it is a kind of presumption, that the Jews had not
at this time the power of life and death, in that, in all Jo-
sephus's history of these times, when criminals abounded
in Judea, and many were put to death by the Roman governors,
we find not the mention of any one put to death by the Jewish
council or magistracy, except those which were stoned in a
vacancy between the death of Festus, (which happened in the
province.) and the arrival of Albinus his successor.

The case is remarkable, and some readers may be willing
to see it here. ' Ananus the younger, who we said just
' now had been put into the priesthood, was fierce and
' haughty in his behaviour, and extremely resolute and

* daring : and moreover was of the sect of the Sadducees, who
' are, above all other Jews, cruel in their judicial sentences.
4 This then being* the temper of Ananus, he thinking he had
' a fit opportunity, because Festus was dead, and Albinus
' was yet upon the road, calls a council ; and bringing be-
' fore them James, the brother of him who is called Christ,
' and some others, he accused them as transgressors of the
' laws, and had them stoned to death.'? Josephus says,
many were offended at this proceeding. ' And some went
4 away to meet Albinus, who was coming from Alexandria,
' andq put him in mind, that Ananus had no right to call a

0 Eyw 8e, irpiv e£era£fiv TIVSQ ovreg, Kai THTIV (TTi^tipeiTS TroXe/mi', Trpairov
£ia.£tv£,<i) TTJV GVfiirXoicrjv TWV Trpo^oKTtaiv' ti \itv ap,vve<jOe r«£ a^iKsvraq, TI
asfivvvtTi Ti)v eXevOepiav ; ei Be. TO SsXtveiv a^opr^rov rjyeiaOe, Trfpiao1?/, irpog
TSQ r/y£juova£ rj fjLt^iQ' /cat yap EKUVUV /i£rpia£oiTwj/, aicrxpov bfioiwc TO fia-
Xeveiv. De B. J. lib. ii. cap. 16. sect. 4. p O de rewrfpog

bv TI\V ao^ifooffwjjv ttyapEV 7ra.pti\T)<f>tvai, Sroaavc; TJV TOV rpOTrov, /cat
TTJG §iaq>f.povTW£' aiptffiv St fitTyti TK\V "SaScsKaiwv, onrtp tiai Trtpi rag
d)[ioi ?rapa TravTag T&Q ladaiaQ' — art fit) uv TOI&TOQ wv 6 A-vavog, vo/JH<raQ t%siv
Kaipov €7rir»j^£(ov, ^ia TO TtOvavai [lev $J;TOV, A\j3ivov de tn Kara TTJV bfiov
vtrapxtiv, KaQi^tt vvvtSpiov Kpirwv" K. X. Antiq. 20. cap. 8. sect. 1.

q Tiveg §s avTiov KO.I TOV AXfiivov VTravTiaZ&aiv airo TIJQ AXeZavSotiaQ b£ot-
, Kai SidaffKiiffiv we HK t%ov r\v A.vav<# XWP4C T^K tKfivs yv^fiijg Ka6iffai
' AXjBivoQ Be, TriioQtiq TOIQ Xtyojwcvoif, ypa^ei JIIT opyrjQ ry
Trap1 avra tineas aTmXaW K. X. ibid.
G2

84 Credibility of the Gospel History.

council without his leave. Albums, approving of what
they said, wrote a very angry letter to Ananus, threatening
to punish him for what he had done. And king Agrippa
took away from him the priesthood, after he had enjoyed
it three months, and put in Jesus the son of Damnaeus.'
Some learned men have suspected those words, ' the bro-
4 ther of him who is called Christ,' to be an interpolation.
But we have no occasion at present to concern ourselves
with that. It is certain, here were some men put to death
by the procurement of the high priest and the council he
summoned ; and the action was judged illegal by many at
Jerusalem, by Albinus the procurator, and by Agrippa, who
had then the government of the temple, and the right of
nominating the high priests. Nay, Ananus had not the
right of summoning the council without Albinus's leave.
And I think, that Josephus's introduction to this story is a
proof, that the council had not the power of life and death
under a Roman procurator. Ananus was of the sect of the
Sadducees, who were cruel in their sentences above all
other Jews. Ananus was of the same temper. Festus
being dead, and Albinus yet upon the road, Ananus thought
he had a fit opportunity to gratify his cruel disposition,
and calls a council, in order to have some men stoned to
death. It is herein implied, that even this fierce and daring-
high priest could not have gratified his cruelty in this way,
if a procurator had been in the country. And though he
thought he had had a fit opportunity, what he did then cost
him the priesthood.

There was likewise a sort of council summoned at Jeru
salem, in order to haver Zacharias, the son of Baruch, con
demned to death : but then they had shook off their sub
jection to the Romans.

But though there appear not any token of this power of
life and death, whilst they were under the Roman govern
ment, yet as soon as they resolve upon the war, we meet
with it very distinctly. They then appointed such and
such to govern at Jerusalem, others to command in Idumea,
others in other places, and Josephus the son of Matthias, our
historian, to command in the two Galilees. When he came
into his government, he says, * choosing seventy of the most

* prudent men of the country, he appointed them to be rulers

* of all Galilee, and in each city also, seven men judges of
4 lesser matters : and directed the more weighty matters, and all

* capital causes, should be brought to himself and the seventy.' 3

T De B. J. lib. iv. cap. 5. sect. 4. s Twv \itv

t7ri\t£ag EK ra tOvsg, Kare^rjffev ap^ovraf oXrjg rrjg FaXi-

The State of the Jews in Judea. 85

It may be said, there is scarce any mention made in Jo-
sephus, of the Jews inflicting lesser punishments. To this
I answer, that these are particulars which rarely occur in
large histories ; the writers judging them too trifling, for
the most part, to appear in their works. I have, however,
given plain evidences from Josephus, of their power of
imprisoning and inflicting lesser penalties.

It is likely also, that what Titus says, of the right of the
Jews to kill any man, though a Roman, who entered beyond
the limits prescribed to uncircumcised men, may be thought
an instance of their having the power of life and death.

But I apprehend the meaning of Titus to be, that if the
Jews had found any Gentile in the court of the Jews, the
Romans had permitted them to take such a one and kill him
immediately. This was a grant or permission with respect
to one particular offence only. Nor can there be any con
sequence drawn from hence to any other cases, nor to a
right of inflicting death in the way of a judicial process,
either upon Jews or Romans. It is evident, that upon oc
casion of other violations of things sacred, committed by
common Roman soldiers, the Jews applied to their pro
curator for justice.1

3. I would now, by way of collateral evidence, give some
few passages of ancient authors concerning the state of other
provinces.

Pilate has, in the gospels, the power of life and death in
Judea. All governors of provinces seem to have had the
same power. If the reader doubts of it, I refer him to the
tenth book of Pliny's epistles, which contain his letters to
Trajan, and the emperor's rescripts. I produce here only
one passage from Philo, who thus aggravates the sufferings
of Flaccus, president of Egypt, when he was accused before
Caligula by some of the most considerable men of that
country. ' He who had been governor was accused by his
* subjects, by those who had always been his great enemies,
6 by men, of whose lives he had lately been lord and master.' u

According to the Roman lawyers whose opinions I have
produced above, the governors of provinces had not only
the power of life and death, but they were also the supreme
judges in matters of property. The same thing is evident
from the ancient Roman authors. v

Xataf. Ta yap jU£i£a> Trpay/zara KO.I rag fyoviKag ducag t<}> tavrov

Trtiv tKeXfiKrs teat Tsg e/3So[j,T]KovTa. De Bell. lib. ii. cap. 20. sect. 5.

1 Joseph. Antiq. lib. xx. cap. 4. sect. 3, 4. u O Se a /car

fiovov, ap^wv Trpoe VTTTJKOWV, /ecu VTTO dvffpevwv aei yivofjuvuv, 6 Trpo

ptog wv rrig iKaars £wjj£. In Flacc. p. 986. Confer. 983. C. D.

v Erat mini in ammo recta proficisci ad exercitum, aestivos menses reliquos

86 Credibility of the Gospel History.

As we find the Jews had a council, so had also the peo
ple of most other provinces senates in their great towns ;
the members of which were chosen according to ancient
custom, w or rules prescribed by the senate or emperors. x

It is also extremely remarkable, that the Jews had coun
cils and magistrates, not in Judea only, but in all the pro
vinces of the Roman empire where they lived. For Philo
says, ' Flaccus apprehending eight and thirty of our senate,
' which our saviour and benefactor Augustus had appointed
' to take care of the Jewish affairs, he led them through the
' town to the theatre, and there ordered them to be whip-

* ped.'y Beside these eight and thirty, Philo mentions three
other Jewish senators who were scourged by Flaccus, after
their houses had been plundered by the Egyptian rabble ;
which disgrace he aggravates in this manner : ' There are

* in that city different methods of inflicting this punishment,
' according to the quality of persons. Egyptians are whip-

* ped by Egyptians, with one sort of rods. Alexandrians

* by Alexandrians only, with another sort of rods. This
' custom former presidents, and Flaccus himself in the

* former part of his government, had observed with regard
' to our people/ Was it not then intolerable, that, when an

* ordinary Alexandrian Jew received the more honourable

* and liberal stripes, if he committed an offence, these rulers,

* the senate, men venerable for their age and dignity, should
' be treated in this respect worse than their subjects, and

* be levelled with the most obscure and most criminal

* Egyptians?'1

From the number of senators mentioned in these two
passages, it may be concluded, the Jews had at Alexandria
a full senate of seventy. Philo speaks of these men in

rei militari dare, hibemos jurisdiction!. Cic. ad Att. lib. v. ep. 14. vid. etEp.
ad Quintum Fratrem, lib. i. cap. 2, 3. et alibi passim.

w Quorum ex testimoniis cognoscere potuistis, tota Sicilia per triennium nemi-
nem ulla in civitate, senatorem factum esse gratis : neminem, ut leges eorum
sunt, suffragiis. — Cic. in Verr. lib. ii. cap. 49. n. 120. vid. et quae sequuntur.
x Cautum est — Pompeia lege quae Bithynis data est, ne quis capiat magis-
tratum, neve sit in senatu, minor annorum 30. Eadem lege comprehensum
est, ut qui ceperint magistratum sint in senatu. Plin. lib. x. ep. 83. vid. et ep. 84.
y Trig yap rf/jifrepaQ jrjpsaiag, t\v 6 aurqp Kai tvepyerqG 2t/3a<ro£
Tb)v I8$aucwv ei\tro — ojcrai Kai rpiaKovra <nAXa/3u>v ivOvg f
In Flacc. p. 975. D. z To tQoQ raro K<U CTTI rwv rjf

v 01 Trpo <I>Xa/cK8, icat <b\a.KKO£ O.VTOQ rag irpwTsg xpov&q. Ibid. p.
976. C. a Ilwf sv 7ray\a\f.7rov TWV ttfiwrwv A\e%avdpewv IsSaiuv

raiQ t\£v9tpui)Tepai£ Kai TroAmicwrfpaif jua<ri£iv reruTrro/zsi/wv, tnrore eSoZav
cpyaaa<r0ai, TSQ ap^ovra^, TTJV y»;p8(Tiav, 01 Kai yrjpajg Kai Ti[Jir)£

fTTwvu/ioi, Kara ruro ro fJttpoc; t\arrov rwv vTTtjKowv eveyKaeOai, KaOairtp

id.

r<*)v AiyvTrnwv rsg aQavt^aruQ Kai cvo%8£ roig /ucyi<roig adiKquaciv. Ibi
D. E.

The State of the Jews in Judea. 87

very magnificent terms, and lie also calls the other Jews
their subjects : but nevertheless the Jews were not exempt
from the jurisdiction of the Roman president, whose authority
appears to be paramount over all. And the former presi
dents, whom Philo does not condemn, and Flaccus in the
former part of his government, when, according* to Philo's
own account, his administration had been admirable and
exemplary, had been wont to punish Jewish people, if they
thought them culpable.

What Philo says of the Jewish magistracy at Alexandria
is confirmed by other writers. For Josephus assures us,
that this same Philo's brother Alexander was alabarch of
the Jews in Egypt. b And Claudius, in an edict published
in favour of the Jews in the beginning of his reign, (which
edict is preserved entire in Josephus,) observes as a precedent,
4 That when a Jewish ethnarch died, Augustus had not for-

* bid the creation of a new ethnarch, c willing that all should

* remain subject to him, but in the observation of their own

* customs.' Which shows likewise, that the Jewish magis
tracy there was entirely subject to the Romans, and was
not to derogate from their government of all.

And after this, Demetrius the alabarch of the Jews at
Alexandria, was so considerable a person, that Mariamne
the second daughter of Herod Agrippa thought fit to be-
stowr herself upon him, when she had divorced her first
husband. d

Strabo, in a passage not now in his works, but cited by
Josephus, says, that * a good part of Alexandria is inhabited

* by this people [the Jews]. They had likewise an eth-

* narch, who administers their affairs, decides causes, and
' presides over contracts and mandates, as if he were the

* governor of a perfect republic.'6

Josephus likewise makes mention of a person, who was
archon or chief magistrate of the Jews at Antioch in Syria, f
at the time that the war against the Jews in Judea was
proclaimed by the Romans.

b Antiq. lib. xviii. cap. 9. p. 821. v. 11. vid. et p. 809. v. 43.

c Kai Tt\fVTfi<ravTOQ TS Isdaiwv 60i>apx«> rov S£j3a<rov fir) ictKuXvictvai i9-
vapx.aQ yivtaQai, (BaXofievov vTTOTtra\Bai fK«T8g tnntvovraq TOIQ idioiQ iQiai.
Joseph, ibid. lib. xix. cap. 5. p. 865. v. 34. d Ty awry fo Kaipy jcat

Mapia/ivtj, Tra^aiT^aafJLivt] TOV ApxeXaoy, avv^Ktjae Aq/itrptw, r<p tv AXt£av-
dptiq. ludaiuv Trpwrfuovrt y(.vti Tf. /cat TrXary TOTS fir) icai rr\v A.Xaflap%iav av-
TOQ tiX£. Joseph. Antiq. 1. xx. cap. 6. sect. 3. e KaOt-arai f«

KCII tQvap-%riQ avT(i)v, OQ FioiKti rt TO eOvoQ icai SiaiTa Kp«m£, KO.I (rv/i/SoAatwi/
tTri/xfXeirat jcai Trpo-rayjuarwv, wf av iroKiTtiaq ap^wv avroTeXsg. Joseph.
Antiq. lib. xiv. cap. 7. sect. 2. vid. et Antiq. lib. xix. cap. 5. sect. 2.

f Hi/ yap ap^wv rwv nr' Aj>riox*<ae Is^aiwv. De Bell. lib. vii. cap. 3.

88 Credibility of the Gospel History.

There is somewhat very remarkable in a decree concern
ing the Jews of Sardis. It deserves to be transcribed here
from Josephus : ' Lucius Antonius son of Mark, pro-
6 quaestor and propraetor, to the magistrates, senate, and peo-

* pie of Sardis, greeting. The Jews which are our citizens
' have shown me, that they have always had an assembly of

* their own according to the laws of their country, ands a
6 place of their own, in which they decide the affairs and
4 differences which concern themselves. Having desired of

* me that it may be lawful for them so to do, I have decreed

* that this (right) be preserved and permitted to them.'h

I have here given this account of the state of the Jews
in other countries, because I apprehend that one great
reason, why many have supposed the Jews had the power
of life and death in Judea, is, because they perceive they
had there an high priest, a council, and other officers or
magistrates. The privileges of the Jews in other countries,
which I have here instanced in, show the inference is not
good. They had even there a senate and magistrates ; but
no one will suppose these had the power of life and death.
Indeed it does not appear, that the people of any province
had it. But the Roman presidents, and they alone, are ever
represented as the supreme judges (next under the senate
or the emperor) in all causes whatever in their several pro
vinces.1

We must therefore suppose, that though the Jewish senate
and other magistrates subsisted in Judea, yet their power
was not exactly the same they had formerly, but was re
strained and diminished under the Roman governors. So
it appears to be in the evangelists ; and between them and
the other writers which I have quoted, there is a perfect
harmony.

Every reader will now be able to observe the beauty and

sect. 3. g Moi tTrtSeiZav tavrsQ avvodov txfiv l^ia^ Kara TSQ

vofjinQ air ap%?7C, Kai TOTTOV ifiiov, ev o> TO. re TT pay par a Kai rag
avTiXoytag fcpivstTi* T&TO re ainjaa/JLtvoiQ, iv' t%r) avroig TTOK.IV, rtjprjcrai Kai
eirirp£\i/ai f/cpiva. Antiq. xiv. cap. 10. sect. 17. h This decree shows,

how justly the apostle rebuked the Christians at Corinth, 1 Cor. vi. 5, 6,
" for going to law" one with another " before the unbelievers :" when they
might have decided all lesser differences among themselves.

' Praeclarum est enim summo cum irnperio fuisse in Asia triennium, sic ut
nullum te signum, -- nulla conditio pecuniae ab summa integritate continen-
tiaque deduxerit. Cic. ad Quint. Frat. lib. i. ep. 1. cap. 2. n. 7. Quare quo-
niam in istis urbibus cum summo imperio ct potcstate ver-aris. Ibid. cap.
10. n. 24. Quam jucunda tandem praetoris comitas in Asia potest esse, in
qua tanta multitudo civium unius hominis nutum intuentur ? — Quare cum per-
magni hominis est - -sic se adhibere in tanta potestate, ut nulla alia potestas
ab iis, quibus ipse prsesit, desideretur. Ibid. cap. 7. n. 18.

The Stale of the Jews in Judea. 89

propriety of St. Peter's style, as well as the reasonableness
of his advice, which he gives, 1 Pet. i. 1, to the " strangers
scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia,
and Bithynia;" provinces, or parts of provinces of the Roman
empire : 1 Pet. ii. 13, 14, " Submit yourselves to every or
dinance of man for the Lord's sake, whether it be to the
King (it should be rendered emperor) k as supreme, or unto
governors, as unto them that are sent by him (from Rome)
for the punishment of evil doers,1 and for the praise of them
that do well." Here is an exact description of the power
and authority which the presidents of provinces were in
vested with, for the administration of justice.

XII. We are now to consult for the external evidences
relating to the state of the Jew^s during the second period,
which reaches from the resurrection of our Saviour to the
reign of Herod Agrippa.

If our Saviour was crucified at the passover in the 19th
year of Tiberius, A. D. 33, which is the opinion of many
learned men, then we have here the space of about eight
years. For Caligula was killed, and Claudius succeeded
him the 24th day of January, A. D. 41.m And Claudius, in
the beginning of his reign, made Herod Agrippa king of
all Judea. But if our Saviour was crucified two or three
years sooner, which is the opinion of many other learned
men, then this period is proportionably of a longer duration.
I enter not here into any inquiry which of these two com
putations is the most probable, because, as will appear pre
sently, it is not material in the present case, or at least not
necessary.

I must however desire the reader to observe here a few
particulars, though they have been partly mentioned al
ready. Archelaus was removed from the government of
Judea, A. D. 6 or 7. Judea and Samaria were then
made a Roman province, with this particular circumstance,
that they were to be a branch of the province of Syria."

k The Greek writers made no scruple to call the Roman emperors kings, though
the Romans did. This is Grotius's observation upon the place. He has given no
instances, because, I suppose, he thought it needless. However, I will put
down two or three here : 01 JJ,EV yap Pw/watwv (3am\ei£ tri\t,i\oav rt /ecu
7rpoatKoap,r]crav TO tepoj/ an. Joseph, de B. J. lib. 5. cap. 13. sect. 6. %pov<^
eg Nfpw^a t) (3a(Ti\tia TrtpirjXOe 7} Pufjiaiwv. Pausan. p. 429. — fiovoQ
(piXocrwQtav, s Xoyoi£, «& ^oy/iarwv yvw<T£(Ti, (Tfjuvy o' eQti, Kat

(3i({) GdMppori fTriTwcraro [Mapjrof] Herodian, lib. i. sect. 3. But as we never
call the Roman emperors kings in our language, the word emperor seems to
me more proper in this place. i Compare this with Ulpian's descrip

tion of the power of the sword. -- St. Peter's (jcaKOTroioi) evil-doers, are
Ulpian's/rtc/woros/. ™ Joseph, de Bell. lib. ii. cap. 11. Sueton.

Calig. 58. Dio. lib. 59. p. 663. C. D. n Joseph, de Bell. lib. ii. cap. 8.

90 Credibility of the Gospel History.

But that this country of Judea might be kept in good or
der, there was an officer, with the title of procurator, sent
by Augustus to reside and govern there, invested with the
supreme authority, or the power of life and death. The
first of these was Coponius, the next Marcus Ambivius, his
successor Annius Rufus, in whose time Augustus died, A.
D. 14. The next was Valerius Gratus, who was appointed
procurator by Tiberius, and continued in the province
eleven years ; and was then succeeded by Pontius Pilate,
who governed Judea ten years. So far every thing is ex
ceeding clear in Josephus.0 There is indeed some debate,
whether these ten years of Pilate expired some time before
the passover, A. D. 36 or 37. I think that Pilate left Ju
dea before the passover, A. D. 36, and shall give my rea
sons in another place.

We must now endeavour to clear up the state of Judea
during the remainder of this period, that is, after the re
moval of Pilate, which cannot be above four or five years
at the most. It may be questioned, whether they had now any
procurator residing among them with power of life and
death, as they had from the year of our Lord 7, to the
year 36 or 37. But that they were subject to the Romans
is certain. For at the same time that the? Samaritans waited
upon Vitellius the president of Syria, entreating that Pilate
might be removed, they made very solemn professions of
their willingness to continue under the Roman government,
and only complained of the tyranny of Pilate. <* And that
the Jews were subject to the Romans in the last year of this
period, A. D. 40, appears from what Herod Ag'rippa says
to Caligula, in the letter he sent to him to persuade him to
revoke the orders he had given for erecting his statue at
Jerusalem : ' I presume not (says he) to ask for my country
' the freedom of the city, nor yet liberty, nor immunity
' from tribute :'r as his letter is given us by Philo.

But I am apt to think, they had no procurator residing
among them, from the time of Pilate's removal to Agrippa's
accession to the kingdom of Judea in the reign of Claudius.
My reasons are these : Josephus's account in his Antiquities,
of the removal of Pilate, is in these words : * Then Vitellius,
' having sent Marcellus his friend to administer the affairs

Antiq. lib. xvii. cap. ult. ° Antiq. lib. xviii. cap. 2. sect. 1, 2.

P The Jews are to be supposed to join with them herein, for they likewise
brought accusations against Pilate, as will appear presently.

q Ov yap CTTI a7ro<raf7fi Pw/iaiwv aXX' ETTI Siatyvyy TIJQ IliXars i>/3p£W£, IIQ
rt]v Tipa/3a0a Trapa-ytveaOai. Joseph. Ant. lib. xviii. cap. 5. sect 2.

r Ei KCII fit] rrjv Pufiaucriv TroXiraav, tXevOtpiav ysv r) $opwv a^eow, «c)f v av
TOIBTOV airr)<raaQai. De legat. ad Caium, p. 1032. C.

The State of the Jews in Judca. 91

* of Judea, commanded Pilate to go to Rome, to answer to
' the emperor for those thing's of which he was accused by

* the Jews.'8 Now I think, that Marcellus could not have
the power of life and death in Judea, because he was sent
thither by Vitellius only ; and no officer under the emperor
could convey this power to another, as we are assured by
Ulpian.* The Jews therefore could not have any one in
their country with this power, till one was sent thither with
it from Italy. But there was no one sent from Rome to
Judea, after this, till the beginning of Caligula's reign. I
shall show hereafter, that Pilate was removed by Vitellius
before the passover, A. D. 36. Therefore for one whole
year, the last of Tiberius, there was no officer residing in
Judea with power of life and death.

Now let us see who was sent into Judea by Caligula in
the beginning' of his reign, and what was the commission of
this officer. Josephus's words are these : * He [Caligula]
' sent Marullus to be master of the horse in Judea.' u Some
would read in Josephus, instead of [Wwa/axip] master of the
horse, [Wa^oi/] president. But all copies agree in the
present reading, and so it was in the time of Epiphanius.v
It is, indeed, difficult to say what Josephus means by this
word.w But he gives the same title to one Jucundus, an
officer in Judea in the time of Florus, their last governor
before the war.x If I may offer a conjecture, (and I can
do no more) I suspect that Josephus means the same officer
who is called in Latin, Praefectus, and Preefectus equitum,
an officer of considerable power under the presidents^

s Kai OvtrsXXiof, Map/ctXXov rov avrs <f>i\ov fKTTE/r^ag e7ri/uX?jrj?J' roig
Isdaioig y£VJj(TO)ti£vov, UiXaror £K£\£u<rev tin Pu/jnjg cnrttvat, Trpog a Karrj-
yopoiev ladaioi SidaZavra TOV avrojtparopa. Antiq. lib. xviii. cap. 5. sect. 2.

1 L. vi. pr. ff. de Off. Procons. et Leg. His words are above, p. 78.

u iTrTrapx^y fo £TTI TT)Q Isdaiag eKTrtfjnrti MapvXXov. Marullum autem misit,
qui equitum magister esset in Judea. Huds. vers. Antiq. lib. xviii. cap. 7.
sect. 10. v iTTTrapxjjv. Ita quidem et Epiphanius. Forsan tamen

tTrapxov legendum. Huds. Not. o. p. 818. w Sed i7T7rapx« voca-

bulum non satis expedio. Petav. Doct. Temp. vol. ii. p. 314.

x UpofftXQwv Se laK&vSoQ o dia.K<o\veiv rfTaypevoc; nrirapxr)Q. De Bell. lib.
ii. cap. 14. p. 1079. v. 21. y Appius noster turmas aliquot equitum

dederat huic Scaptio, per quas Salaminios coerceret, et eundem habuerat prse-
fectum. Vexabat Salaminios. Ego equites ex Cypro decedere jussi. Moleste
tulit Scaptius. Cic. ad Att. lib. v. ep. 21. Fuerat enim prsefectus Appio ; et
quidem habuerat turmas equitum, quibus inclusum in curia senatum Salamine
obsederat. — Itapue ego, quo die tetigi provinciam, cum mihi Cyprii legati ob-
viam venissent, literas misi, ut equites ex insula statim decederent. Id. 1. vi.
ep. 1. Scaptium, quia non habuit a me turmas equitum, quibus Cypnun
yexaret, ut ante me fecerat, fortasse succenset j aut quia prsefectus non est, &c.
ib. ep. 3. Gabius Bassus, praefectus orae Ponticae,— venit ad me. Plin. lib. x.
ep. 32. vid. et ep. seq.

92 Credibility of the Gospel History.

and who was sometimes sent into a remote part of a pro
vince to keep things in good order. This Scaptius was a
praefect under Appius, Cicero's predecessor in the province
of Cilicia, and was sent by him into Cyprus, then a branch
of the province of Cilicia. In Jike manner Marcellus was
sent into Judea by Vitellius. And as for Marullus, as he
seems to me to have had the same title with Scaptius, so I
think he had the same power and authority with him and
Marcellus. only he was appointed by the emperor, they by
presidents.

But whatever was Marullus's post, there is no reason to
think he was procurator or governor, since in all the copies
of Josephus he is called only master of the horse.

Farther, I think there was no procurator of Judea be
tween the removal of Pilate and Agrippa's reign, because all
the great concerns of Judea in this time are managed by Vitel
lius, and then by Petronius, presidents of Syria. Soon after
the removal of Pilate, Vitellius displaced Caiaphas the high
priest,2 and the next year Jonathan, a whom he had put into
Caiaphas's room. It was through the hands of Vitellius,
that the Jews obtained from Tiberius the liberty of having
the high priest's vestment in their own keeping. b Afterwards
all Caligula's orders about setting up his statue at Jerusa
lem, and the method of treating the Jews if they opposed it,
are directed to Petronius, Vitellius's successor ; and the
Jews make all applications to him. We have here one
particular advantage. During the rest of the time which
we are concerned for, we have little light from any one but
Josephus. But the history of Caligula's design to pollute
the temple at Jerusalem, is to be found in Philo as well as
Josephus. But yet there is nothing said of any Jewish
procurator ; no orders sent to him by Caligula or Petro
nius ; no mention made of him by the Jews in any of the
petitions they presented at this time; nor is his conduct
blamed or commended by either of the forementioned
writers. That the name of an inferior officer does not ap
pear is not strange,0 but that the procurator of Judea

z Joseph. Antiq. lib. xviii. cap. 5. sect. 3. a Ibid. cap. 6. sect. 3.

b Ibid. cap. 5. sect. 3. c And yet Philo has made mention of one

Capito, who was at this time collector of the Roman tribute in Judea ; and
ascribes in part the ill-will which Caligula bore the Jewish nation, to calum
nies forged against them by this Capito, the better to defeat the complaints
which might be brought against himself, for the exactions he had been guilty
of in his office. HapartStjKTai Se vvv pa\\ov rj Trporepov &, £7ri<roX?j£ r\v

t7Tfjuv//£ Ka?rirwv 0opwv 6/cXoytvf' lira tvXafirjQtiQ fJtr)TiQ avrs ytvrjrai

Karrjyopia, TEXVTJV tTTtvorjvtv rj diafSoXatg rwv aSiicr)9tVTwv diafcpacrcrat rag
atria? K. T. \. Philo de legat. p. 1020. E. And this passage ought to be

Tfie State of the Jews in Judea. 93

should not be mentioned, if there was one, is unaccount
able.

This then was the state of Judea in this period. Pontius
Pilate was procurator there till some time before the pass-
over, A. D. 36. After that there was no procurator in the
country, but the Jews were immediately under the govern
ment, first of Vitellius, and then of Petronius, presidents of
Syria, till the accession of Herod Agrippa. There might
be an officer under these presidents of Syria, called master,
or prefect of the horse, but there was no officer constantly
residing in Judea with power of life and death.

We are now to cast our eye upon the transactions of this
period related in the Acts of the Apostles. Peter and John
and the other apostles, were summoned before the Jewish
council, imprisoned, threatened, scourged, Stephen was
stoned, and a very severe persecution commenced, and was
carried on for a considerable time against all the disciples
of Jesus in that country, and at Damascus. This may be
thought very extraordinary, if the Jews were (as certainly
they were at this time) under the Roman government, and
if they had not the power of life and death within them
selves.

Now I would in the first place observe, that though the
state of Judea, as I have just now represented it from Jo-
sephus and Philo, did not afford us any considerations
which might enable us to account for such a behaviour of
the Jews, as seems inconsistent with their subjection to the
Romans, yet it may be fairly supposed, from St. Luke's
history, that the Jews were very riotous and turbulent at
this time.

Here was now in this country a number of men, who
affirmed that Jesus, who had wrought no temporal deliver
ance for the Jewish people, was the Christ ; that He who
had been lately condemned and crucified by them, was now
risen from the dead, and was ascended up to heaven. They
exhorted even the rulers of the Jews and all the people to
repentance. They proved their assertions, and supported
their exhortations by no other method, but by reasonings
from the scriptures, and by a healing power exerted on
many miserable objects. But however, the priests and all
the rulers were grieved that they taught the people, and
preached through Jesus the resurrection of the dead ; and
though these disciples of Jesus made no tumult, yet they
were firm in their tenets ; and, when commanded by the

added to the proofs I have given above, that the Jews were tributary to the
Roman emperor.

94 Credibility of the Gospel History.

council, " not to speak at all, nor preach in the name of Je
sus," they scrupled not to profess, that it was with them an
undoubted maxim rather to " obey God than them," and
told them, Acts iv. 20, that they " could not but speak the
things which they had seen and heard." And so they did.
Whereupon we find, they were brought again before the
council, ch. v. 28, and " the high priest asked them, saying,
Did not we straitly command you, that you should not
teach in this name? And behold ye have tilled Jerusalem
with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood
upon us." May not any man be assured that the high
priest, who spoke these words, and the council in whose
name he spoke, would exert all the authority they were
possessed of against the disciples of Jesus? as rulers in
synagogues beat them there, as members of the council
issue out orders for apprehending all of that way, imprison
them, whip them in public places ; and, if this was all they
could do themselves, have them, after that, before the go-
^vernor ; and if he did not fully execute their rage, by artful
insinuations raise a spirit in their people, which the most
vigilant administration could not hinder from breaking out
sometimes in riots, and such like disorders, by which some
of the followers of Jesus might lose their lives. No people
in the wrorld are always peaceable and orderly as they
should be, and the Jews were as likely as any to assume a
power that was not legal. We have proofs of it in Jo-
sephus. ' When Fadus came procurator into Judea, he found

* the Jews of Perfead in a riot fighting with the Phila-
t delphians about the limits of the village Mias. And indeed
4 the people of Persea had taken up arms without the con-
' sent of their chief men, and had killed a good number of

* the Philadelphians. When Fadus heard of it, he was
6 very much provoked that they had taken unarms and not
' left the decision to him, if they thought the Philadelphians
' had done them any wrong.'6 There is another instance of
the like kind afterwar(Js. The Samaritans had offered an
injury to some Jews, as they were passing through their
country to Jerusalem. The Jews made reprisals. ' Here-

* upon the chief men of the Samaritans go to Umidius
' Quadratus, president of Syria, then at Tyrus, and ac-

* cuse the Jews of plundering and burning their towns.

* Nor were they so much concerned, they said, for the in-

d That is, on the other side of Jordan. e Tavra TtvQo^vov TOV

<I>afiov aQodpa irap(i)%vvtv, on pi] Tt]v tcpiGiv avrqt TrapaXciTroiev, eiTrep VTTO rwv
&i\a8t\<J)r)vc()v tvo[jii%ov aductiaOai, aXX' aSewg e$>' OTrXa %ti)pr)aeiev. Ant. XX.
cap. i. sect. 1.

The State of the Jews in Judea. 95

'jury done to them, as for the contempt showed to the
' Romans, to whom they ought rather to have appealed as

* judges, if they had been injured, and not make incursions
' of their own heads as they had done, as if they were under

* no subjection to the Romans. They therefore came to him
' for justice.' f

The riot of the Jews beyond Jordan seems to have hap
pened in the interval between the death of Herod Agrippa,
and the arrival of Fad us in the province. The incursions
into Samaria were made while Cumanus was actually in
Judea. Indeed Josephus endeavours to acquit the chief
men of Judea as to both these facts. But the common peo
ple seldom take arms, and make incursions, without some
encouragement from their superiors. And if the chief men
at Jerusalem were perfectly innocent as to this last affair,
Quadratus, the president of Syria, must have been horribly
imposed upon, though he came into the country on purpose
to examine the case upon the spot. For he beheaded some
Jews, and crucified others, and sent the high priest, the
captain of the temple, and divers other chief men at Je
rusalem, to Rome, to answer for themselves.?

If then some of the Jewish proceedings mentioned in the
Acts, seem not very suitable to the state of a Roman pro
vince, it may be fairly taken for granted, they were illegal
or tumultuous.

But, secondly, I am apt to think the state of the Jews at
this time, if reflected on, will help us to account for these
proceedings. If our Saviour was crucified at the passover,
A. D. 33; then this was the eighth passover of Pilate's
administration, for he came into the province before the
passover of the year 26. But if our Saviour was crucified
in the 29th year of the Christian sera, which is the soonest
that is supposed by any, yet that would be the fourth pass-
over after Pilate's arrival in that country. Now it was
very common for the presidents, if they had not behaved
well, to stand in fear of the people of their province ; and
they dreaded extremely the sending complaints to the em
peror. And in order to ward off these, they usually thought
it proper to do some popular things.

Philo has given us a remarkable instance in Flaccus,
prefect of Egypt, about this very time. The five first

Kat, TTEpi p,f v (tiv avroL TTEirovQaaiVj &% OVTWQ ayavaKTiiv, £<j)a<TKov, a>£ on
Pa>/iaiwv »cara0pov^(T£tav, t<j> OVQ Kpirag txP*lv «*>?"«£ etTrtp rjSiicsvTo Trapa-
•y£V£<j$ai, tj vvv J>£ 8^ tyovTwv t)y£^.ovaQ P(t)p,aisg /caradpa/mv. Antiq. XX.
cap. 5. sect. 2. « Vid. de Bell. lib. ii. cap. 12. sect. 6. Antiq. ubi

supra.

96 Credibility of the Gospel History.

years of his administration, which were the live last years
of Tiberius's reign, Flaccus was a most excellent governor.
But in the sixth year of his presidentship, which was the
first of Caligula's reign, he became quite another11 man. It is
not necessary to produce here all the reasons of this altera
tion. But in the lifetime of Tiberius, Flaccus had been no
friend of Caligula. When therefore Caligula came to be
emperor, and had put to death the young Tiberius, and
Macro, in whom Flaccus had some interest, he wras thrown
into a terrible fright : his concern was visible, and all the
Egyptians knew very well the cause of it : hereupon they
got him entirely into their own hands, ' and of a governor
' Flaccus became a subject, and they of subjects became
' presidents, inventors of useless decrees, directors of all

* affairs, taking him in as a mere mute image in a play, for
' no other reason but because he had the name of governor.1
' These men therefore, the Dionysii, the Lampones, the
' Isidores, all these conspire together to form a most wicked

* design against the Jews ; and coming to Flaccus, they

* tell him ; " Sir, you have lost the young Tiberius, and
6 your next hope after him, your friend Macro ; you have no
' expectations of favour from the emperor, but rather other-

* wise. We must necessarily contrive for you some power-

* ful advocate with Caius [Caligula], This advocate, Sir,
' is the city of Alexandria, which has been ever honoured

by the imperial family, and especially by our present so-
vereign : if she may but obtain some favour of you, she
will undertake your cause. You can oblige her by no-
thing so much, as by delivering up the Jews into her
hands." Then he, who ought to have been provoked at
so impudent a proposal, and to have reprimanded the au
thors of it as incendiaries, and disturbers of the public peace,
tamely complied with what they desired.5
After this, Flaccus began to show a strange neglect of

h Philo in Flacc. p. 965, 966. ' Kat -yivtrai 6 ptv apxw UTTT/KOOC,

01 £' VTTTJKOOI rjjfuoveg, ficrjjya/ifvoi fj.ev a\vffiTt\ei?arag yvupas /3e/3aiajrai

yap wv tfiuktvaavro TTUVTWV tyivovro, KCJ^OV a>£ ETTI GKt]vr)Q 7rpo<rw7mov, tvfKa
7rpoaxr]p,aTO£ avrov \iovov 7rapaXa/jj6avoiT££ fTriyfypa^/zEvov ovo^ia ap^f,
Aiovvcnoi, Aa^Trwvfc, Iffidupoi, cra<7iap%at, 0iXo7rpayjtiov£f, KCIKUV evptrai — —
OUTOI (3&\tvp,a /3«\£i;8<Ti Kara TUJV la&uwv apyaXfwrarov,
XOovrtg, idiq, <j)a<riv, eppti fitv 001 TO. aTro

KO.I tppet de KO.I 6 fifr^ (.KUVQV £\7rig £raipog croi Ma/cpa»v, aitria (?
<TOI ra aTro ra Kpar&vrog' Set fie 7rapaK\r)TOV rif^aQ evpeiv dvvaTwrepov,
a.i' 6 fit Trapa/cXrjrog, rj TTO\IQ AXt£av$p£wi' £<rtv,
ap%?/t,' aTrag o 2f/3a<roc oiico£, diatyepovTOJc; d' o vvv
' ayaQov adtv avrrj Trapz&ig, r\ TSQ InSaiuQ ticd&G KO.I
TUTOig o0£iXwv a7T(0(T£(T0at /cat <5wtr;££pavai TSQ Xfyovra^ WQ
Koivsg 7roXf/ii8f, cruvfTTiypa^Erai TOIQ X£^;0£t<rt. Ibid. p. 988. A.— C.

The State of the Jews in Judea. 97

the Jews, and in all causes the Jews were cast, till at length
he became their open enemy. The Egyptians taking en
couragement from this behaviour, came by degrees to the
rifling- of the Jews' houses, and murdered great numbers
of them. ' And the president of the country, who, if he had

* pleased, could in one hour have quieted this mad multi-

* tude, pretended not to see or hear any thing.' k The
Egyptians receiving no rebukes for what they had done al
ready, proceeded to demolish the Jewish oratories at Alex
andria.

Thus matters went in Egypt. The people there had no
right, according to the constitution of the country, to treat
the Jews as they did ; nor did the prefect formally convey
the power of life and death to them. But for his own con
venience he overlooked their disorderly proceedings. The
case of Pilate in Judea seems very much to have resembled
that of Flaccus in Egypt : that is, they were both appre
hensive of the emperor's displeasure, though perhaps the
grounds of these apprehensions were different. Pilate had
been tyrannical in the very beginning of his administration,
and had thereby rendered himself disagreeable to the Jews :
for this reason he stood in fear of them. This appears in
the prosecution of Jesus before him. The Jews cried out,
John xix. 12, " If thou let this man go thou art not Caesar's
friend." Pilate seems to have understood the meaning of
this speech. If he had not gratified them in this point, they
might have drawn up a long* list of mal-administrations for
the emperor's view.

His condemnation of Jesus at the importunity of the Jews,
contrary to his own judgment and inclination declared to
them more than once, was a point gained : and his govern
ment must have been ever after much weakened by so mean
a condescension. And that Pilate's influence in the province
continued to decline is manifest, in that the people of it
prevailed at last to have him removed, in a very ignomini
ous manner, by Vitellius, president of Syria. It is therefore
highly probable, that to screen other acts of injustice, and
to gratify the chief men at Jerusalem, he might sign de
crees of condemnation against some of the disciples of Jesus :
or at least connive at, or not restrain, some irregular pro
ceedings of the Jewish magistrates, and the riots of the
people. Nor can it be concluded, that Pilate did not act
in this manner, because he had not the favour of the people

k T« fo fTrirpoTra rrjg %o>paf, 6c JJ.OVOQ tdwaro f3x\r)9tig upq. pup rtjv
QX^OKpanav Ka6t\£iv, TrpoaTroiafitva a, rt fa>pa /LJIJ bpav, Kai wv TJKHI fjirj
£7rccK8£iv. Id. dc Legat. ad Cai. p. 1010. E.

VOL. I. H

§8 Credibility of the Gospel llislvry.

of his province. For Flaccus did himself no real service
by all his compliances with the Egyptians, but was at last
accused by the men whose tool he had been.1

After this manner, then, affairs might be carried on in
Judea, during the remainder of Pilate's administration after
the resurrection of our Saviour, till about the beginning of
the year 36.

And after the removal of Pilate, the Jews would, very
probably, take an unusual licence ; they not having then
any procurator among them, but being more immediately
under the government of the president of Syria, whose chief
residence was at Antioch.

Besides, Vitellius seems to have been at a yet greater
distance from them the greatest part of the year that follow
ed the removal of Pilate. This, if I mistake not, was the
season of Vitellius's expedition to Parthia. It is true, that
Suetonius1" and Dion place the congress of Vitellius and
Artabanus in the first year of Caligula, But Josephus0
placeth it in the last of Tiberius's reign ; and gives so
distinct an account of this matter, that he cannot but be re
lied on. He says, that Vitellius having, whilst in Syria,
ordered Pilate away for Rome, went up to Jerusalem to the
passover, which appears to me very evidently to be the
passover of the year 36. Having put Caiaphas out of the
priesthood, and done divers other things to the great satis
faction of the Jews, he returned to Antioch. Josephus then
says, that Vitellius having received orders from Tiberius to
make an alliance with Artabanus, went to the Euphrates,
where Vitellius and Artabanus had a congress, and a league
was made ; that Artabanus sent his son hostage to Tiberius ;
that after the league was made, Herod the Tetrarch of
Galilee, who was there, entertained the president of Syria,
and the king of Parthia ; and sent an express to Rome with
an account of the conclusion of this treaty, as did also
Vitellius. Herod's messenger came first to Rome, and
Tiberius wrote back to Vitellius, that his express brought
him no news, for he had heard all before. Vitellius think
ing Herod had done him a great injury herein, retained a
secret grudge against him. till he had an opportunity of

1 Vid. Phil, in Flacc. p. 985, 986. m Namque Artabanus, Par-

thorum rex, odium semper contemt unique Tiberii prse se ierens, amicitiam ejus
[Caii] ultro petiit, venitque ad colloquium legati consularis ; et transgressus
Euphratem, aquilas et signa Romana Caesarumque imagines adoravit, Calig.
cap. 14. n O ysv BirtXXiof 6 Aa/ciof — Kai TOV ApTaflavov KareTrXrjle

Tt a7ravTr)ffaQ avrip ££a7rij/auo£ Trtpi rov Ev$paTt)V rjdij OVTI, Kai tg rt Xoysg
avTov virqyaytTO, /cat 9vaat TO.IQ TS A.vys^s TS re Vais HKOGIV qvayKaas. Lib.
59. 661. B. C. ° Antiq. lib. xviii. cap. 5.

The State of the Jews in Judea. 99

being' revenged in the reign of Caligula. At the next
passover, A. D. 37, Vitellius was again at Jerusalem. So
that this expedition to the Euphrates was made in the year
36. Josephus appears perfectly master of this whole affair :
the concerns of Herod the tetrarch are interwoven with it.
Josephus was nearer the event than Suetonius or Dio-.
Besides, Tacitus concurs with him. For he says, that A. U.
788, which is the year of our Lord 35, when C. Cestius
Gallus and M. Servilius Nonianus were consuls, Tiberius P
gave Vitellius the command of all things in the east. He
then relates Vitellius's expedition, and what he performed
in it, and concludes his account thus ; * And then he re-
' turned with the army into Syria. I have here put toge-
' ther the actions of two summers. 'q I think it therefore
very plain, that according to Tacitus, this commission given
to Vitellius in the year 35, was finished in 36.

This then was a fine opportunity for a people fond of pow
er, to exert some acts of authority they could not have done,
whilst a governor was among them or near them. The
behaviour of Ananus and his council, in the interval be
tween the death of Porcius Festus, and the arrival of his
successor Albinus, is a proof of it. Nor were there any,
on whom they were so likely to show their power, as the
followers of Jesus.

Moreover, such was the temper of this Vitellius, that it
may be fairly supposed, the Jews enjoyed some peculiar
indulgences under his administration.

There are divers things recorded of him in Josephus,
which may satisfy us there was a very loving correspond
ence between him and the chief men of the Jewish nation.
At the request of the Jews and Samaritans he removed Pi
late. The passover following, .he went up to Jerusalem,
and was magnificently received by the Jews. It was
through his hands that the Jews obtained from Tiberius
the right of having in their own keeping the high priest's
sacred vestment, which he wore on their great solemnities ;r
a privilege they had not enjoyed before, since the begin
ning of Herod's reign. This favour they received at the
passover in the year 36.

In the beginning of the next year, when Vitellius was
going to march his forces through Judea, which was the
shortest way, to attack Aretas, at the request of the Jews he

. P Et cunctis quee apud Orientem parabantur, L. Vitellium praefecit. Ann.
lib. 6. c. 32. q Exin cum legionibus in Syriam remeavit. Quae duabus

sestatibus gesta conjunxi, quo requiesceret animus a domesticis malis. Ibid,
cap. 37. fin. 38. init. T Joseph. Antiq. lib. xviii. cap. 5. sect. 3.

100 Credibility of the Gospel History.

ordered his troops to take another route, that he might not
offend them with his idolatrous ensigns ; and when he had
given these orders, he went up himself to Jerusalem to
worship God.s Vitellius is not to be blamed for any of
these things ; but they are an argument, that the Jewish
people had a great influence upon him.

And from the Roman historians it appears, that Vitellius
was a man of most obsequious disposition. For he, who
had sacrificed to God at Jerusalem, when he was out of his
province and returned to Rome, paid divine honours to the
emperor ; and indeed was one of the first that began that
idolatrous worship, which Caligula was so fond of in the
latter part of his reign. Vitellius was so exquisite in this
and other kinds of flattery, that at length his name became
proverbial to denote an eminent flatterer.1

And though it should be still thought, notwithstanding
what I have said above, that Marcel 1 us and Marullus were
possessed of the full powers of a procurator in Judea, yet it
must be allowed, that Vitellius had a great influence on the
affairs of Judea all the time he was president of Syria after
the removal of Pilate, because all the great concerns of the
Jews mentioned by Josephus are transacted by him.

I have not attempted to settle the date of the particular
facts of this second period related in the Acts of the Apostles.
Learned men are very much divided about the year of Ste
phen's death, which is the most remarkable of all those facts.
Archbishop Usher places it in the year 33, u Bishop Pearson
in the latter end of the year 34, v Mr. Basnage in the year
37. w The disciples of Jesus were, I think, much harassed
by the Jewish council from the very beginning, immediate
ly after the descent of the Holy Ghost upon them at pente-
cost ; though about the time that Stephen was stoned, a
more fierce and more general persecution came on, and con
tinued for some time, Acts viii. 1. xi. 19. And though it
may be difficult to settle exactly when it began, and when
it ended, yet I think it most probable, that though it might

8 Kai ha fjityaXs Treats KtXsvffag x<i)ptiv TO TrjoaroTTtdov, avrog rf
Hpw^s TS rerpapx« Kai rwv 0i\wv etg ItpoaoXvpa avgti, 0Y2QN TQ 6EG.
Josep. ibid. l Idem, rairi in adulando ingenii, primus C. Csesarem

adorari ut Deum instituit : cum reversus ex Syria non aliter adire ausus esset,
quam capite velato, circumvertensque se, deinde procumbens. Suet. A. Vitell.
cap. 2. Caeterum regendis provinciis prisca virtute egit. Unde regressus, et
formidine C. Caesaris, familiaritate Claudii, turpe in servitium mutatus exemplar
apud posteros adulatorii dedecoris habetur. Tacit. Ann. lib. vi. cap. 32. vid.
et Senec. Natur. Quaest. lib. iv. cap. 1. etDion. lib. lix. p. 661. C. D.

u Ann. p. 617. ed. Lat. Lond. 1650. v Ann. Paulin. p. 1.

w Annal, P. Eccles. A. D. 37. n. 14, 15.

The State of the Jews in Judea. 101

be abated in the year 38, it was not over before the third
year of Caligula's reign, that is, the thirty-ninth year of the
Christian sera: in which year Vitellius was recalled from
Syria, and was succeeded by Petronius.* Nay, possibly it
was not quite at an end till the year 40.

If some few of the Jewish proceedings in this period
seem somewhat extraordinary, I imagine, they may be ac
counted for from the particular state of the affairs in
Judea which I have just given a view of. The reader
is able to judge of it himself, and I make no more re
flections.

We are now to observe the remarkable words of St. Luke,
Acts ix. 31. " Then had the churches rest throughout all
Judea, and Galilee, and Samaria." This rest of the churches
will be easily accounted for from the following particulars.
Soon after Caligula's accession, the Jews at Alexandria suf
fered very much from the Egyptians in that city, (as has been
already observed,) and at length their oratories there were all
destroyed. In the third year of Caligula, A. D. 39, Petro-
nius was sent into Syria, with orders to set up the emperor's
statue in the temple at Jerusalem. It is not improbable,
but the Jews of Judea might be affected at the condition of
their countrymen at Alexandria, where by this time they
were almost ruined ; but this order from Caligula was a
thunder-stroke. There is indeed some doubt, whether Pe-
tronius published this order in the year of our Lord 39 or
40. But whenever it was made known, the Jews must
have been too much engaged afterwards to mind any thing*
else, as may appear from the accounts which Philo and Jo-
sephus has given us of this affair.

Josephus says, ' That Caligula ordered Petronius to go
with an army to Jerusalem to set up his statues in the
temple there; enjoining' him, if the Jews opposed it, to put
to death all that made any resistance, and to make all the
rest of the nation slaves. Petronius therefore marched
from Antioch into Judea with three legions and a large

body of auxiliaries raised in Syria. All were hereupon

filled with consternation, the army being come as far as

Ptolemais. y The Jews then gathering together went to

the plain near Ptolemais, and entreated Petronius in the

first place for their laws, and in the next place for

themselves.' Petronius was moved by their entreaties,

and leaving his army and the statues at Ptolemais, went

into Galilee ; and at Tiberias calls together the chief men

* Vid. Noris. Cenotaph. Pis. Diss. ii. p. 330, 331. Pagi Critic in Baron,
A. D. 32. n. 2. y Joseph, de Bell. lib. ii. cap. 10. sect. 1.

102 Credibility of the Gospel History.

of the Jewish people, and exhorts them to submit to the

emperor's orders. When they could not engage so to do, he

asked them, 'Will ye then fight against Caesar? The Jews

answered him, that they offered up sacrifices twice every

day for Ccesar and the Roman people. But that if he

would set up the images, he ought first of all to sacrifice

the whole Jewish nation, and that they were ready to

submit themselves, their wives and children, to the

slaughter.2 '

Philo says, that the tidings of these orders having reached
Jerusalem, the Jews, ' abandoning their cities, villages, and
' the open country, all went to Petronius in Phenicia, both
' men and women, the old, the young, and the middle aged ;
that they threw themselves down upon the ground before
Petronius, with weeping and lamentation ; that being or
dered by him to rise up, they approached him covered
with dust, with their hands behind them, as men condemn
ed to die ; and that then the senate bespoke Petronius in
this manner : " We come to you, Sir, as you see, unarm
ed. We have brought with us our wives, and children,
and relations, and throw ourselves down before you, as at
the feet of Cains, having left none at home, that you may
save all, or destroy all."'*

Petronius deferred his journey to Jerusalem, that the
Jews might not, out of concern for such a violation of their
religion, neglect their gathering in their corn, it being then
ripe, as Philo says ;b or lose the seeds-time, as Josephus
says.c He was the more moved by this consideration, be
cause it was expected, that Caligula would be at Alexan
dria the next summer: and he judg'ed it not proper to do
any thing that might hinder a sufficient plenty for the com
pany that would follow the emperor from Italy, and the
concourse of the princes of Asia, and other great men in
those parts. And in his letter to Caligula he made use of
this, as the excuse for not immediately executing his orders/1
These two writers differ somewhat as to the time when the
Jews waited on Petronius. Possibly they might be recon
ciled together even as to this. However, they agree in
representing the concern of the Jews as very great and
general. And it is very likely, that the persecution of the
Christians ceased now, and that the Jews were fully em
ployed in warding off this terrible blow from the temple,
which was their glory and confidence.

2 Ibid. sect. 3, 4. vid. et Antiq. lib. xviii. cap. 9. a Philo de legat.

ad Cai. p. 1024, 1025. b Ibid. p. 1028, A. c Joseph. Antiq. lib.

xviii. cap. 9. sect. 4. d Philo ubi supra.

The State of the Jews in Judea. 103

Some learned men have ascribed this rest of the churches
to the conversion of St. Paul, who had been a very zeal
ous persecutor. But this is, in my opinion, to do St. Paul
a great deal of wrong* on one hand, and too much honour
on the other. It appears to me a great injustice, to ascribe
to him all the sufferings of the Christians which ensued
upon the death of Stephen ; when, after his conversion, we
find the Jews of Judea, Damascus, and every other place,
were filled with malice and spite against Christianity, and
against St. Paul and every one else of that way. On the
other hand, it is doing him at the same time too much ho
nour. St. Paul was then but a young man, Acts vii. 58,
and though a forward and active instrument, yet he could
be no more than an instrument in that persecution. It can
not be supposed, that whilst he was with the high priests
and pharisees, they were directed and animated by him ;
and that when he had left them, their spirits were so sunk
that they could no longer pursue their old measures. His
own dangers at Damascus and Jerusalem are a proof of the
contrary.

Moreover, according to the series of St. Luke's history,
though the great persecution he speaks of, Acts viii. 1, xi.
19, might be abated sooner, yet it could not be quite over
till several years after St. Paul's conversion. St. Luke
first mentions St. Paul's return from Damascus to Jerusa
lem, (which was not till three years after his conversion,
Gal. i. 18.) and the treatment he met with from the Grecians :
" which when the brethren knew, they brought him down
to Ceesarea, and sent him forth to Tarsus. Then had the
churches rest throughout all Judea, and Galilee, and
Samaria, and were edified, and walking in the fear of the
Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Ghost, were multi
plied," Acts ix. 30, 31.

Lastly, according to the description St. Luke gives us
of this rest of the churches in the words just now trans
cribed, it was very extensive, even all over Judea and
Galilee and Samaria, and very complete, and the churches
had no molestation. So considerable an event must have
been owing to some other considerable event with which
the whole people of that country was affected. I had no
sooner read the account which Philo and Josephus have
given of the sufferings of the Jews in Alexandria, and the
imminent danger of ruin which that whole people in Judea
and other places were in, in the reign of Caligula, but I
concluded, that this state of their affairs brought on the rest
of the Christian churches which St. Luke speaks of, and

104 Credibility of the Gospel History.

which certainly happened about this time. Whether I am
in the right or not others will judge.

St. Luke has not expressly told us how long this rest of
the churches lasted, but it is likely that it reached some
way into Herod Agrippa's reign. He was at Rome when
Caligula was killed, and was very serviceable to his suc
cessor Claudius, in settling matters between him and the
senate.6 But this is certain, that the great danger the Jews
were in of utter ruin in the reign of Caligula, and the
gracious as well as just edicts passed in their favour by
Claudius, in the beginning of his reign, had little effect
upon them. For St. Luke says, that when " Herod
stretched forth his hand to vex certain of the church, and
killed James with the sword," the satisfaction which they
expressed in these cruelties, was an inducement to him " to
take Peter also," Acts xii. 1—3.

XIII. This brings me to the proceedings of the third
period, the reign of Herod. But I need not add any thing
here to what has been already said in the former chapter;
where it has been shown, that Herod had at this time sove
reign authority in Judea, though he was dependent on the
Roman emperor.

I have now given the reader a view of the state of Judea,
according to the sacred and other writers, so far as I pro
posed at the beginning of this chapter.

I must not proceed any farther, till 1 have owned myself
much indebted to Mr. Huber, for his Dissertation f on this
subject. But by this acknowledgment I have not dis
charged all my obligations to that learned and agreeable
writer. I have found him a good guide, upon other occa
sions beside this.

I am sensible some learned men have given a different
account of this matter: but it will not be expected I should
enter here into controversies with any. This argument is
long enough already. I shall, however, make a few re
marks upon Dr. Lightfoot'ss account taken from the Tal-
mudical and other Jewish writers.

1. Lightfoot11 quotes these words from the Jerusalem
Talmud. ' A tradition : forty .years before the temple was

* destroyed, judgement in capital causes was taken away from

* Israel.' And he says himself,1 ' It cannot be denied but

e Joseph, de Bell. lib. ii. cap. 11. fZachariae Huber Dissertationum

Libri tres. Amst. 1 72 1 . Dissertatio prima, qua adseritur Judaeorum magistra-
tus, tempore Christ! Servatoris, non habuisse merum imperium, sive jus gladii.

s See his Hebrew and Talmudical Exercitations on Matt. xxvi. 3. John
xviii. 31. h Ibid. p. 248. ' Ibid. p. 611.

The State of the Jews in Judea. 105

< that all capital judgment, or sentence upon life, had been
' taken from the Jews for above forty years before the
' destruction of Jerusalem, as they oftentimes themselves

* confess.' I think, the natural meaning of the words of
the tradition is, that the people of the Jews were deprived
of the right of inflicting capital punishment by some supe
rior power or force. It does therefore in the main confirm
my account. For since we know, that Judea was a Roman
province for some considerable time before the destruction
of Jerusalem, it may be reasonably concluded, the Roman
government had taken away judgment in capital causes.
But this tradition is inaccurate as to the time ; for if the
Jews had lost this power for forty years before the destruction
of the temple, then they had it not in the reign of Herod
Agrippa, and consequently not after Judea was first made
a Roman province, A. D. 6 or 7, which was above sixty
years before the ruin of their city. However, it is plain the
just mentioned Herod had supreme power in Judea. How
far he entrusted the council with judgment in capital
causes, I do not pretend to determine.

2. But yet Lightfoot says, ' The Romans did not take

* away their power of judging in capital matters, but they

* by their own oscitancy, supine and unreasonable lenity,
' lost it themselves. For so the Gemarah goes on : " Rabh

* Nachmanbar Isaac saith, Let him not say that they did not

* judge judgments of mulcts, for they did not judge capital
'judgments either. And whence comes this? When they

* saw that so many murders and homicides multiplied upon

* them, that they could not well judge and call them to an

* account, they said, It is better for us that we remove from

* place to place ; for how can we otherwise not contract a

* guilt upon ourselves?" — They thought themselves obliged

* to punish murderers, whilst they sat in the room Gazith ;
' for " the place itself engaged them to it." They are the

* words of the Gemarists. Upon w7hich the gloss, — They

* removed therefore from Gazith, and sat in the Taberne.'k
I cannot think this is a just account. If robbers and mur
derers were so numerous, that the council could not punish
them ; yet certainly the Christians were not able for forty
years together, before the destruction of the temple, either
by their own numbers, or by their interest with the people,
to strike any awe upon the council. And if they had a
lenity and tenderness for Israelitish robbers and murderers,
(which 1 do not deny,) yet they had little or no tenderness
for Christians, if there be any truth in the history of the New

k Id. Ibid. p. 612.

106 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Testament, or of ancient Christian writers. And yet they did
not judge any of these capitally. For so the tradition,
confirmed likewise (as Lightfoot allows) by many Jewish
writers, says, ' judgment in capital causes had been taken
' away from them for forty years before the destruction of
4 the temple.' Since therefore they did not judge Christians
capitally, and since they could not be restrained from it by
any dread of the Christians, nor by lenity toward them, it
follows, they must have been hindered by some superior
authority. And what could that be but the Roman ?

3. * That we may yet farther confirm our opinion,' says
Lightfoot, ' that the authority of their council was not

* taken away by the Romans, we will produce two stories,
6 as clear examples of the thing we assert. One is this :

* R. Lazar, son of R. Sadock, said, " When I was a little
' boy, sitting on my father's shoulders, I saw the daughter
' of a priest that had played the harlot, compassed round
6 with faggots and burnt." Hieros. Sanhedr. fol. 24. 2. The
' council no doubt judging and condemning her, and this
' after Judea had then groaned many years under the
' Roman yoke, for that same R. Lazar saw the destruction
' of the city.' The other story is taken from the same book,
and is told of one ' Ben Sudta, in Lydda. They placed two
' disciples of the wise in ambush for him, and they brought
6 him before the council and stoned him. — The Jews openly

* profess that this was done to him in the days of R. Akiba,

* long after the destruction of the city ; and yet then, as
4 you see, the council still reta;ned its authority in judging

* of capital causes. They might do it for all the Romans, if
' they dared to do it to the criminals.'1 I think the first,
R. Lazar's story, proves too much ; for it not only proves
that the Romans had not taken away this power from the
council, but that it was not taken away at all for forty years
before the destruction of the temple. But this is a contra
diction to the tradition, which Lightfoot allows to be true,
and well supported. If we must suppose the sight the
little boy is said to have had sitting upon his father's
shoulders, to be matter of fact, it will be needful to re
concile it with the tradition above mentioned. This T do
not know how to do any otherwise, than by supposing, that
the tradition represents the legal state of the constitution
they were under, for forty years before the destruction of
the temple ; and that the burning of the priest's daughter,
if it was done by order of the Jewish council, was an irre
gular and illegal action. The same thing ought also to be

1 Ibid. p. 249.

The State of the Jews in Judea. 107

supposed of the second story, if it be true. But this way
of reconciliation would not suit Lightfoot.

Upon the whole, though the tradition confirms my ac
count, I cannot but think, that the testimonies I have al
leged relating to the subject, are preferable to the testimo
nies of Talmudical, or other later Jewish writers. All the
authors I have quoted must be allowed to have been ac
quainted with the form of government, which the Romans
established in their provinces ; and Josephus must have
known the state of Judea in particular. And I hope the
reader is convinced, that there is upon this subject a per
fect agreement between these authors and the sacred writers
of the New Testament.

I shall borrow one passag'e more from that learned
writer : ' Christ answers the treachery of the question pro
pounded (upon the tribute money) out of the very deter
minations of the schools, where this was taught ; Where
soever the money of any king is current, there the in
habitants acknowledge that king for their lord. Maimon.
on Gezelah, ch. 5.'ra

There remain two or three particulars, which, not regard
ing the main point in question, have not yet been consider
ed ; but however may not be quite omitted.

XIV. St. John says, chap, xviii. 3, " Judas then having
received a band of men, and officers from the chief priests
and pharisees, cometh thither, to tha garden." Ver. 12,
" Then the band, and the captain, and officers of the Jews
took Jesus." This band I suppose to have consisted of
Roman soldiers. The Greek word [o-Tret/aa] is, I think, ever
used in the New Testament concerning soldiers. " Then
the soldiers of the governor took Jesus. And gathered
unto him the whole band of soldiers," Matt, xxvii. 27.
Mark xv. 6, " Cornelius a centurion of the Italian band."
Acts. x. 1, xxi. 31, xxvii. 1.

Farther, when the chief priests and pharisees went to
Pilate, and desired he would " command that the sepulchre
be made sure unto the third day. He said unto them, Ye

have a watch, [tx6Te wwwp&avTj go your way, make it as sure
as you can," Matt, xxvii. 64, 65. From whence one would
be apt to conclude, that there was, at least at the feast times,
a guard of soldiers upon duty, from which they might draw
out a sufficient number for any particular purpose.

" As they were about to kill him, [Paul,] tidings came
unto the chief captain of the band that all Jerusalem was
in an uproar : who immediately took soldiers and centurions,
m Id. on Matt. xxii. 20

108 Credibility of the Gospel History.

and ran down unto them, Acts xxi. 31, 32. And lie com
manded him to be carried into the castle. And as Paul
was to be led into the castle, when the chief captain had
given him licence, Paul stood on the stairs, and there
spake unto the people, ver. 37 — 40. And when Lysias
sent Paul from Jerusalem to Csesarea, it was under a strong
guard of horse and foot," ch. xxiii. 33.

There was therefore at Jerusalem a Roman officer, who
had the government of the castle, and a good body of troops
under him.

A passage or two from Josephus will confirm and illus
trate these particulars. * Antonia,' says he, ' was situated

* at the angle of the western and northern porticoes of the
' outer temple, [or outer court of the temple.] It was
' built upon a rock fifty cubits high, steep on all sides. It
' was the work of king Herod, in which he had shown his
' usual magnificence. On that side where it joined to the
' porticoes of the temple, there were stairs reaching to each
' portico, by which the guard descended ; (for there was
' always lodged here a Roman legion) and posting^ them-

* selves in their armour in several places in the porticoes,

* they kept a watch on the people on the feast days, to

* prevent all disorders. For as the temple was a guard to
' the city, so was Antonia to the temple.' This from the
history of the Jewish War.n In his Antiquities he says :
' The feast called the passover approaching, at which it is
' our custom to eat unleavened bread, and a great number of
6 people being come up from all parts to the feast. Cumanus
' fearing some disturbance, commanded a company of sol-
' diers to post themselves in their armour in the porticoes of
' the temple, to suppress disorders, if any should happen :
4 which was what the procurators had been wont to do at
' the feasts.'0 This Cumanus was Felix's predecessor : and
this order was given, as it seems, A. D. 48. P

The reader must needs observe here two things : first,
that there was always a legion which kept garrison in the
castle at Jerusalem. Secondly, that at the feasts there was
a detachment of these soldiers, which came down from the

n KaOa 3t Gvvr}7TTO TCIIQ rs upa <roat£, eig

01 0p«poi KaOrj^o yap an €?r' avrrjQ ray/ja Pwynaiwv, KCU
rag <70«£ /ifra TWV otrXtov, tv raig foprcrif, rov firj/jiov, MQ fir] n

apeQvXarTov' 0pspto^ yap fTrtfctire ry 7ro\« \LIV TO
r\ kvTwvia. Lib. v. cap. 5. sect. 8. ° KtXevfi TIOV

avaXafi&vav TCI OTrXa tin Ttov TS itps <rowv vzavai
TOV veuTepifffjiov, ei crpa TIC; yevoiTO' TSTO de. Kai 01 Trpo UVTS Tr\Q ladaiac;
rpoTTfixravTfg ev Taig eopraic fTrparrov. Antiq. lib. XX. cap. iv. sect. 3.
P Vid. Pagi Critic, in Baron, et Basnage Annal. A. D. 48.

The State of the Jews in Judea. 109

castle, and kept guard in the porticoes of the temple. It
may be questioned what was Lysias's post at Jerusalem.
Grotiusi supposed that he was captain of a cohort that
kept guard at the feast time. I cannot at present assent to
this. It does not appear to have been feast time when Paul
was seized, (though Pentecost was near, Acts xx. 6, 16.) It
seems plain to me, that Lysias was not upon duty at the
temple at this time. " They laid hands upon Paul. And
all the city was moved, and the people ran together ; and
they took Paul, and drew him out of the temple, and
forthwith the doors were shut. And as they went about
to kill Paul, tidings came to the chief captain of the
band, that all Jerusalem was in an uproar. Who immedi
ately took soldiers, and centurions, and ran down unto
them," ch. xxi. 30 — 32. If Lysias had been in the porti
coes of the temple, he would have perceived the disturb
ance himself; whereas he knew nothing of it but by tidings
brought to him, and that not till " all Jerusalem was in an
uproar." It is observable also, that Lysias afterwards
summoned the whole council of the Jews. The wordr
which we render ' band,' is used with considerable latitude :
the word we have rendered < chief captain,' signifies pro
perly a captain of a thousand, and is often used particularly
for a tribune. I suppose therefore, that Lysias was the
oldest tribune at Jerusalem, and that he was the command
ing officer at the castle of Anton ia, and was entrusted by
Felix with what power he thought fit to give to the chief
officer under him at Jerusalem.

XV. We may now proceed to another particular. St.
John says, ch. xviii. 12, " Then the band, and the captain
peat o x^a/^X09] and officers of the Jews, took Jesus and
bound him." I am inclined to think the captain here
mentioned was a Jewish officer ; but I do not insist upon
it. I add, therefore, two or three other texts. " And as they
spake to the people, the priests, and the captain of the temple,
fo oTpaT^o-s T8 te/>s] and the sadducees came upon them,
Acts iv. 1. Now when the high priest, and the captain of
the temple, and the chief priests heard these things, ver. 24.
Then went the captain with the officers," ver. 26. 1 believe
most persons will suppose, that this ' captain of the temple'
was a Jewish officer. There is in Josephus such an officer
mentioned, who is evidently a Jew.

q Praefecto ejus cohortis, quae temporibus festis, ac proinde etiam in Pen-
tecoste, presidium habebat in porticibus templi ad prohibendos tumultus, si
qui orirentur, in Act. xxi. 31. r STrttpa, avvaZie, TrXrjOoQ

Phavorinus.

110 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Whilst the above-named Curaanus was procurator of
Judea, there happened a dreadful difference between the
Jews and Samaritans. Curnanus not being able to put an
end to it, Ummidius Quadratus, president of Syria, came
into Judea, and punished several Jews and Samaritans upon
the spot, and sent others to Rome. This last part of his
conduct is thus expressed by Josephus in his Antiquities :
' Having bound the high priest Ananias, and the captain
' Ananus,8 he sent them to Rome to give an account of their
' conduct to Claudius Caesar.' fc In his War of the Jews it
is thus : * And moreover he sent away to Caesar the high
' priests Jonathan and Ananias, and Ananus the son of this

* last mentioned.'11 Ananus, who in the former passage has
the title of captain, is in this latter said to be the son of the
high priest.

When Josephus is reckoning up the causes of offence which
the Jews gave the Romans, he says : ' And at the temple
' Eleazar, the son of Ananias the high priest, a young man
' of a bold and resolute disposition, then captain^ per-
' suaded those who performed the sacred ministrations, not
' to receive the gift or sacrifice of any stranger (or man of
' another nation). This was the foundation of the war with

* the Romans ; for they rejected the sacrifice of Caesar for
' them. And though the high priests, and many of the
6 chief men, entreated them not to omit the ancient custom of
' sacrificing for their governors, they would not be per-
c suaded ; relying upon the multitude they had on their
' side, — and especially being much at the direction of the
4 captain Eleazar.' Here is another captain, who is a son
of an high priest ; and he appears to have an authority over
those who were in waiting' at the temple.

St. Luke, in one place, speaks of the captains in the plural
number, chap. xxii. 52, " Then Jesus said unto the chief
priests and captains"* of the temple, and the elders which
were come to him." As there was a great variety of
ministrations at the temple, and a great number of priests
and Levites always in waiting, but especially at the feasts,

s Tov <rpar»7yov Avavov dycrac;. l Lib. xx. cap. 5. sect. 2.

u Kai Avaviav, TOVTC TUTS TraiSa Avavov. DeBell. lib. ii. cap. 12. sect 6.

v EXea£apO£ viog Avavia TH ap%i£p£W£ , vtaviag Spacrwrarog, Tpar^yaw rort,
TSQ Kara TIJV Xarpaav \tirspy&VTa.£ avcnrtiQei, p,r]dtvo£ a\\o(pv\s ouoov r\ Sv-
mav Trpoad^x^Oai' rsro Oe r]v TB ?rpog Pw/iaisg 7ro\t/i8 KarafioXr)' rr\v yap
i>7T£p T8Tb)v Svciav Ka«rapO£ cnreppi^av' feat TroXXa rwv re «p%ifpea»y /cat TWV
yvwjoijuwi/ TrcrpaicaXsvrwr, fjirj TrapaXtTrav TO i;7rep rcov rjytnovuv eOog, SK

' iro\v [ttv /cat ry afarepq) 7r\qOti TTtiroiQoTtc, jwaXi

TOV EXeaZapov Tpar/jyavra. De B. J. ii. cap. 17. sect. 2.

w See Whitby upon the placef

The State of the Jews in Judea. Ill

it is very likely there was an officer who presided over each
division, and that there was one who had a command above
all the rest.

XVI. I have but one thing more to take notice of here.
When St. Paul had appealed to Caesar, " Then Festus,
when he had consulted with the council, answered, Hast thou
appealed unto Csesar ? Unto Csesar shalt thou go," Acts
xxv. 12. The reason of the thing* will induce us to suppose
this was not the Jewish sanhedrim, but some council which
the governor had with him.

It was always usual for the presidents to have a council
consisting of their friends, and other chief Romans in the
province.x Philo says, when the Jews waited upon Petro-
nius, and entreated him to defer his march to Jerusalem till
they had sent an embassy to Rome, Petronius was moved
by their tears and lamentations, ' and consulted with his
' assessors what was proper to be done/y Josephus speaks
of Cumanus's acting ' with the advice of his friends,' in the
sentence he pronounced upon a Roman soldier, who had
tore a book of the law of Moses.2 In the year of our Lord
66, Florus, who was then procurator of Judea, sent Cestius
Gall us, president of Syria, false accounts (as Josephus says)
of the Jewish behaviour. * And the chief men of Jerusa-
' lem were not silent. For they, and Bernice, wrote to

* Cestius an account of Florus's mal-administrations in the

* city. He, therefore, having read the informations he had
' received from both parties, consulted with his cap tains.' a
It is one of Cicero's complaints against Verres, that when
he was in Sicily, he condemned a person without asking the
advice of the council, which his predecessor, and he himself
had been wont to advise with.b

x Tac fo drj TrapE^pae CLVTOQ tavrq 6Ka<rc>£ atpcirai. K. T. X. Dio. p. 505. E.

y E7T££ava<ra£ Se p.tTa TWV avvtSpuv f/SaXtuero TO. Trpafcrfa. De legal, ad
Cai. p. 1027. B. z Kai 6 Ka/javog -- ffvufi&XtvaavTwv KO.I rwv

(j>i\u)v, TOV evvflpiaavTa. roi£ VO^OIQ TpartwrTjv TTfXeKicrag. Ant. lib. xx. cap.
4. sect. 4. a MZTO. 77yf/*ovwv ej3s\tvtTo. De Bell. lib. ii. cap. 16.

sect. 1. b lllud negare posses, aut nunc negabis ; te consilio tuo

dismisso, viris primariis, qui in consilio C. Sacerdotis fuerant, libique esse sole-
bant, remotis de re judicata judicasse ? In Verrem, lib. ii. n. 81.

112 Credibility of the Gospel History.

CHAP. III.

OF THE STATE OF TI/E JEWS OUT OF JUDEA.

I. The Jews numerous in divers parts out of Judea. II.
The twelve Tribes in being. III. Prayer wont to be
made \_at Philippi~\ by the river side. IV. The Syna
gogue of the Libertines. V. Of Jewish Proselytes.

I INTEND not here a distinct consideration of the power
or privileges, which the Jews enjoyed in foreign countries.
Somewhat has been already said upon this subject in the
preceding* chapter, and more particulars may be found in
the eighth chapter of this book. I here take notice of a
few things which fall within the compass of my design, but
are omitted in those other places.

I. There are frequent intimations in the New Testament,
that at the time the apostles preached the gospel, after the
ascension of our Saviour, there were great numbers of Jews
in several parts of the world, beside those which lived in
Judea.

When the disciples had " been filled with the Holy
Ghost, (on the day of Pentecost,) and began to speak with
other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance," it is said :
" There were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of
every nation under heaven. — And they were all amazed,
saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak
Galileans? And how hear ^ye every man in our own tongue
wherein we were born ? Parthians, and Medes, and Elam-
ites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judea, and
Cappadocia, Pontns, and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, in
Egypt, and in the parts of Lybia about Cyrene, and
strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Ara
bians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful
works of God," Acts ii. 4 — 11.

The persons spoken of are Jews, or proselytes, chiefly the
former. By dwelling at Jerusalem must be understood
residing there for a time only, on account of the feast, or
some other particular occasion. The worda is so used some
times, and the context obliges us to understand it so here.

In the history of St. Paul's travels, we find him preach
ing in Jewish synagogues in many places : when " Paul
a Vid. Grot. Act. ii. 5.

The State of the Jews out of Judea. 113

and Barnabas came to Antioch in Pisidia, they went into
the synagogue on the sabbath day," Acts xiii. 14. They
did so likewise at Iconium, ch. xiv. 1. Paul taught in a
synagogue at Thessalonica, ch. xvii. 2; at Athens, ver. 17 ;
at Corinth, ch. xviii. 4 ; at Ephesus, ch. xix. 8.

That the Jews were scattered abroad, and dwelt in al
most all parts of the world, even before the destruction of
their city and state by Titus, is evident from many passages
of Philo, Josephus, and several heathen authors. I shall
select a few of them, which will be sufficient for the present
design.

Philo, in his book against Flaccus, prefect of Egypt in
the beginning of Caligula's reign, says, ' There were not
' less than a million of Jews in Alexandria and other parts of

* Egypt.' b He adds, « For one country does not contain the

* Jewish people, they being extremely numerous ; for which

* reason there are of them in all the best and most flourish-

* ing* countries of Europe and Asia, in the islands as well
' as on the continents; all esteeming for their metropolis

* the holy city, in which is the sacred temple of the most
' highc God.'

Caligula had given orders'1 to Petronius, president of
Syria, to erect his statue at Jerusalem. When the tidings
that Petronius had published these orders came to Rome,
Agrippa the elder was there. He therefore sent the empe
ror a letter (for he was not then able to appear before him
in person) to dissuade him from this design. In this letter,
which Philo has given us an account of, among other
things, Agrippa says : * Nor can I forbear to allege in behalf
of the holy city, the place of my nativity, that it is the me
tropolis, not of the country of Judea only, but of many
others, on account of the many colonies that have been
sent out of it at different times, not only into the neigh
bouring countries, Egypt, Phenicia, both the Syrias, but
also into places more distant, to Pamphylia, Cilicia, and
many parts of Asia, as far as Bithynia, and the recesses of
Pontus. They are in the same manner in Europe, in Thes-
saly, Beotia, Macedonia, ^Etolia, Agros, Corinth, in the
most and best parts of Peloponnesus. Nor are the conti
nents only full of Jewish colonies, but also the most cele-

Jvai on 8K a7ro<)£8<7i [Jivpiactov ticarov TH\V
pav Isfouoi KaroiK8vrff CTTI rs Trpog Aiflvqv KarajSaOfia

In Flacc. p. 971. C. c la^aisg yap xwPa /^ia ^^

Kat A<TI^ Kara re vrjaag Kai rjiretpsf, eKVf/iovrat, /ijjrpOTroXiv juev r»jv
JT/sutvoi, Ka0' »Jv iSpvTai o ra uU'tTa 0£8 vewf aytog. Ibid. E.
'd A. D. 39, or 40.
VOL. I. I

114 Credibility of the Gospel History.

' brated islands, Euboea, Cyprus, Crete; not to mention
' those which are beyond the Euphrates. For excepting"
' only a small part of Babylon, and some other lesser dis-
' tricts, scarce any country of note can be mentioned, in

* which there are not Jewish inhabitants. If you grant
' this request in favour of my native place, you will be a

* benefactor not to one city only, but to thousands of cities
' in every part of the world ; in Europe, in Asia, in Lybia,

* in the maritime and in the inland parts of the continents
« and the islands.'6

When the war was breaking out in Judea, Agrippa the
younger, in a speech he delivered at Jerusalem, makes use
of this as an argument to persuade the Jews in Judea to be
peaceable ; that if they should be worsted, they would in
volve their countrymen in other parts of the Roman empire
in the same ruin. ' You expose to danger, says he, not
' only yourselves, but those also who live in other cities : for
' there is not a people, in all the world, which has not some
' of you among f them.'

II. St. James's Epistle is thus inscribed, ch. i. 1, " To the
twelve tribes which are scattered abroad greeting;" by
whom, I think, the apostle intends the believing Jews of all
the twelve tribes, who lived in any part of the world out of
Judea.s For I suppose, that the two tribes of Judah and
Benjamin were not entire in Judea, but that many of those
tribes lived also in other parts, and that the ten other tribes
were not extinct. Ptolemy Philadelphus having a desire to
enrich his library at Alexandria with the Jewish law, wrote
to Eieazar the high priest, to send six Jews out of each
tribe to make a translation of it for him into the Greek
language. In the answer which Eleazar sent to Ptolemy
are these words : * We have chosen six elders out of each
1 tribe, whom we have sent to you with the law.'h This is a
proof that Josephus (from whom I have taken this account)
did not suppose the ten tribes were extinct.

In the account of Ezra's journey from Babylon to Jeru
salem, and of the people that went with him, in the reign of
Artaxerxes, Josephus is more express. For he says : * But

Haffai yap f£a> ptpSQ j^pa-^iOQ Ra[3v\(i)vo£ icat ruv aXXwv <rarpa7rawi>, at
£%8<n rrjv tv KVK\(^ yrjv, I«£ai8f e^sffiv oi/cj/ropaf ' wg re av /zfra-
Xafiy as rrjc; ev^evfiag 77 €fjLt] Trarptf, « jua 7roXt£, aXXa icai pvpua TMV aXXwv
fvspyersvTai KCL& cjca<rov tfXi/za TIJQ oucsptvqQ idpvOtivai, TO EypwTraiov, TO
AifivKov, TO Affiavov, TO iv ^Trcipotf, TO ev vr\Goiq^ TrapaXoi/ re /cat /ifaoyftov.
De Legat. ad Cai. p. 1031, 1032. f Joseph, de Bell. lib. ii. cap. 16.

p. 1089. fin. s Vid. Grot, in loc. h ETrtXe^aiei/ de KOI

7rp£(T/3vrep8£ ctvSpat; e% airo
Antiq. lib. xii. cap. 2. sect. 5.

The State of the Jews out of Judea. 115

' the whole people of the Israelites remained in that coun-

* try ; whence it has come to pass, that there are but two
' tribes subject to the Romans in Asia and Europe. But
6 the ten tribes are still in being beyond the Euphrates, an
6 infinite multitude, whose numbers are not to be known.' l

III. There is frequent mention made in the Acts of the
Apostles, of the Jewish synagogues in the heathen countries,
and of the worship they performed in them: but there is
somewhat particular in the description of the place of wor
ship which the Jews had at Philippi. Acts xvi. 13, " And
on the sabbath we went out of the city by a river side,
where prayer was wont to be made." There is some differ
ence among learned men, whether the original word in this
place, which we have rendered prayer, should be here un
derstood of the act, or the place of prayer. k I am inclined
to think with Whitby, Grotius, and others, that it is a place
of worship which is here spoken of. But what I am chief
ly concerned to observe here, agreeably to my design, is,
that it may be inferred from this text, that it was not
unusual for the Jews, at least in strange countries, to wor
ship, or to erect places of worship, near a river.

There is an instance of this kind recorded by Josephus,
who has given us the decree of the city of Halicarnassus,
permitting the Jews to build oratories ; a part of which de
cree runs thus : ' We ordain that the Jews, who are wil-
' ling, men and women, do observe the sabbaths, and per-
' form sacred rites according to the Jewish laws, and build
4 oratories by the sea-side according to the custom of their

* country ; and if any man, whether magistrate or private

* person, give them any let or disturbance, he shall pay a

* fine to the city.'1

And Tertullian,™ among other Jewish rites and customs,
such as feasts, sabbaths, fasts, and unleavened bread, men
tions shore-prayers, that is, prayers by the sea-side or river
side.

These two passages are sufficient to persuade us, that it
was common for the Jews to worship in these places. But

O de TTUQ XaoQ IffoarjXiToiv Kara xatpav fp,uve' dio Kai dvo <j>v\ctQ fivai av\i-

Xai Trspav tiaiv Ei/0par« tug fovpo, jwvpia^g ctTrapoi, Kai
fiij Swafievac Antiq. lib. xi. cap. 5. sect. 2. k Ov

Trpofftvxn tivai. l AedoKrai rjp.iv Isfiaiuv TSQ j3sXof.ievsg avdpag re

Kai yvvcuKaQ ret Tt <ra/3/3arct ayuv, /cat ra tfpa vvvrtXeiv ptra Tag IndaiKSQ
vop,8Q, KUI TO.Q Trpoo-cu^af TToitivQai Trpog ry SaXaaay Kara TO Trarptov £00£. K.
r. \. Joseph. Antiq. lib. xiv. cap. 10. sect. 24. m Judaei enim festi,

sabbata et coena pura,— - et jejunia cum azymis, et orationes LITORALES,
quae utique aliena sunt a diis vestris. Tertul. ad Nat. lib. i. cap. 13,

116 Credibility of the Gospel History.

it may be a question, whether this practice was owing to
their choice, or to some necessity laid upon them by the
heathen magistrates, to perform their worship without the
gates of their cities.

I shall lay together a few passages and remarks relating
to this subject.

It seems to me, that Tertullian supposed the shore-pray
ers to be properly a Jewish custom, since he reckons them
with others that were so. The terms of the decree of the
people of Halicarnassus imply the same thing. And the
sea-side does not appear to be mentioned as a restraint or
limitation, but as a grant of a privilege, establishing* the
oratory in the place most agreeable to the Jews. Philo
says, that when Flaccus the prefect of Egypt had been taken
into custody at Alexandria by order of Caligula, the Jews
offered up thanksgiving to God, spent the whole night in
hymns and songs, ' and early in the morning flocking out of

* the gates of the city, they go to the neighbouring shores,

* for the [proseuchee] oratories were destroyed ; and stand-

* ing in a most pure place, they lift up their voices with one
4 accord.'11

It is true, their oratories at Alexandria were then all
down. But yet methinks here are some signs, that the sea
side was a place agreeable to them. Why else did they go
out of the city so universally toward the neighbouring shores,
rather than any other way ? Besides, Philo expresses much
satisfaction in this situation, when he calls it a most pure
place.

There is a passage very apposite to this text in the ac
count Philo gives of the annual rejoicings the Jews were
wont to make for the Septuagint translation. ' Wherefore/
says he, * even to this day, there is kept every year a feast

* and solemnity in the isle of Pharos ; whither not only the
' Jews, but many others also cross over, to pay a respect to

* the place, where this version was first seen. — And after
' prayers and thanksgivings, some raise tents on the shore,

* others lay themselves down upon the sea-sand, in the open
4 air, and there feast with their friends and relations, esteem-
4 ing the shore more sumptuous than the furniture of the
4 richest palaces.'0

These passages have sometimes inclined me to think, that

ry e^»

rag yap Trpocrcu^ag a<j>r]ptjvTO' KQV T<$ Ka0apa>rar<£» ^avnc. avejSorjaav bfioOv-
padov, K. T. \. Phil, in Place, p. 982. D. ° Uo\vT6\£?tpav TTJQ tv

/SatriXaoif KaTaffKtvrjg rore rrjv aKTrjv NOMIZONTES. Phil, de vit. Mosis,
lib. ii. p. 660. .A. B.

The State of the Jews out of Judea. 117

the true rendering" of this text is thus : ' Where it had been

* thought fit that the oratory should be ;' implying the Jews'
choice of that situation. But if any think, that the more
natural meaning of the words is, 6 Where a house of prayer

* was allowed, or appointed, to be by the law ;' yet I believe
it ought to be supposed, that this appointment was perfect
ly agreeable to the Jews, if not owing to their own choice.
Josephus, having mentioned the privileges bestowed upon
the Jews at Alexandria by Alexander the Great, says :

* They continued to enjoy the same honour under his suc-
' cessors, who set apart for them a distinct place ; that they

* might live in greater purity, than they could well do if

* they were mixed promiscuously with strangers; and allowed
' them also to be called Macedonians.' P This separating
the Jews from other people was no hardship therefore but a
privilege.

St. Luke tells us, that St. Paul and his company, in their
way to Jerusalem from Miletus, " sailed into Syria and
landed at Tyre. And finding' disciples, we tarried there
seven days. And when we had accomplished those days,
we departed and went our way, and they all brought us on
our way, with wives and children, till we were out of the
city : and we kneeled down on the shore and prayed," Acts
xxi. 3 — 5. I should have concluded from this very text,
that it was then usual for the Jews, or some other people, to
pray by the sea-side. It appears from passages alleged
above, that it was a very common practice among the
Jews.

IV. We may now proceed to somewhat else. Ch. vi. 9,
" Then there arose certain of the synagogue which is called
the synagogue of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alex
andrians, and of them of Cilicia, and of Asia, disputing with
Stephen." This synagogue of the Libertines was at Jeru
salem. But it has some relation to the state of the Jews
out of their own country, as will appear presently : and
therefore I consider this particular here.

Some have made a question, whether there be any more
than one synagogue here spoken of. Others think the
most natural meaning of the words imports as many syna
gogues, as there are nations, or sorts of men spoken of. The
copulative particle and, is supposed a proof of it. If St.
Luke had intended but one synagogue, he would have said,
of the synagogue of the Libertines, Cyrenians, Alexandri-

fie avroig rj ri\ni] Kai Traoa TWV ^ta^o^wv, 01 Kai TOTTOV
Tav, OTTWC Ka9aptorspav f.\mtv rr]v ^lairav
T<DV aXXo^wXwv, K. X. De Bell. lib. ii. cap. 18. sect. 7.

118 Credibility of the Gospel History.

ans, &c. not as he does, of the Libertines, and Cyremans,
and Alexandrians.

The Jewish writers say, there were four hundred and
eighty synagogues in Jerusalem. 1 It is generally supposed
by learned men, that beside the synagogues which belong
ed to the stated inhabitants of the city, the Jews of other
countries, in which there was any considerable number of
that people, had a synagogue at Jerusalem, built at their
own cost, together with a school or academy adjoining, to
which they might resort for divine worship, when they
came to Jerusalem ; and where their children might be
educated and instructed in the perfect knowledge of their
law. The Jewish authors do expressly mention a syna
gogue, which the Alexandrian Jews had at Jerusalem. r It
is highly probable, the Jews of several other nations had
one there likewise.

But the Libertines here mentioned seem not to be so called
from any particular country. Libertinus or Libertine, is
one who had been a slave, but has now obtained his free
dom ; or one who is the son of a person that had been a
slave, and was afterwards made free. And it is supposed
by several learned men,8 that the Libertines here spoken of
are Jews, or proselytes of the Jewish religion, who had been
slaves to Roman masters, and had been made free, or the
children of such.

That these are the persons here spoken of, will appear
from the following particulars.

There was a great number of the Jews at Rome. Jose-
phus says, the embassy which came thither from Judea to
petition Augustus, that Archelaus might not be their king
after Herod, was joined by above eight thousand Jews at
Rome.1 Philo informs us, that the Jews who lived at Rome,
and who occupied a large quarter of the city,u were chiefly
such as had been taken captive at several times, and had
been carried into Italy, and were made free by their Roman
masters. v

That these Jews were called Libertines will appear plainly
from passages of Tacitus, and Josephus, and Suetonius, in
which they speak of the banishment of the Jews from Rome
in the reign of Tiberius. ' It was then resolved also,' says

q Vid Vitring. de Synag. vet. lib. i. Part. I. cap. 14. p. 253. vid. et Grot.
in loc. r Vid. Lightfoot Heb. et Talm. Exercit. in loc.

6 Vid. Grot, in loc. Pearson. Lection, in Act. Apost. iv. sect. 7. Vitring. ubi
supra, p. 254, 255. l Ant. lib. xvii. cap. 13. in. u MeyaX^v TTJQ

PWJUTJC a7rorojU7/v. Philo de leg. ad Cai. p. 1014. C. v Pw^cuot

fie ijffav 01 7r\£i8£ aTreXevOepwOti'TtQ' cu^iaXwroi yap cfxQtvrtQ etQ IraXtav VTTO
T(I>V Krrjffafievwv ij\tv9tpwQr)ffav. Ibid. D.

The State of the Jews oat of Judea. 119

Tacitus, ' to expel the Egyptian and Jewish rites. And a

* decree of the senate was passed, that four thousand of the
' Libertine race infected with that superstition, and who

* were of a fit age, should be transported into the island of
' Sardinia, and that the rest should depart Italy within a

* time limited, unless they renounced their profane rites. >w

Joscphus says of the same affair, ' Tiberius ordered that

* all the Jews should be expelled from Rome. And the
' Consuls chose out four thousand of them, whom they sent
' into the island Sardinia.'*

Suetonius says, < That Tiberius sent the Jewish youth

* into some of the most unhealthful provinces, and ordered

* the rest of that nation, and all others of their religion, to

* leave the city, upon pain of perpetual servitude.' y

Joseph us and Suetonius expressly call those Jews, whom
Tacitus calls men of the Libertine race. As there were so
great numbers of these men at Rome, it is not at all unlike
ly, that they had a synagogue at Jerusalem.

I have said nothing new under this article. I have only
followed Grotius and Vitringa, especially the latter; who, I
think, has given a just account of this matter ; though, it is
likely, some learned men may not be exactly of the same
opinion.

V. We have mention made several times in the gospels
and Acts of the Apostles, of the zeal of the Jews to make
proselytes to their religion, and of several proselytes in
particular. Matt, xxiii. 15, " Woe unto you, scribes and
pharisees, hypocrites ; for ye compass sea and land to make
one proselyte." Acts ii. 10, " And there were dwelling- at
Jerusalem — strang'ers of Rome, Jews and proselytes." Acts
vi. 5, " And the saying pleased the multitude : and they
chose [for deacons] Stephen, Philip, Nicanor, and Nicolas
a proselyte of Antwcli" Chap. xiii. 43, " Now when the
congregation [in the synagogue at Antioch in Pisidia] was
broken up, many of the Jews and religious proselytes, fol
lowed Paul and Barnabas." Ch. viii. 26—28, " And the
angel of the Lord spake unto Philip, saying : Go— unto

w Actum et de sacris JEgyptiis Judaicisque pellendis : factumque patrutn
consultum, ut quatuor millia libertini generis ea superstitione infecti, quis
idonea setas, insulara Sardinian! veherentur, — caeteri cederent Italia nisi certum
ante diem profanes ritiis exuissent. Tac. Ann. lib. ii. cap. 85.

TTO.V TO lafou/cov TTJQ POJJUJJ^ airtXaQtivat' 01 8e vTraroi,

rr\v vrjaov.

Joseph. Antiq. lib. xviii. cap. 4. fin. y Judaeorum juventutem,

per speciem sacramenti, in provincias gravioris cceli distribuit : reliquos gentis
ejusdem, vel similia sectantes, urbe submovit, sub pcena perpetuse servitutis,
nisi obtemperassent. Suet. Tiber, cap. 36.

120 Credibility of the Gospel History.

the way that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza. And
he arose and went : and behold a man of Ethiopia, an
eunuch of great authority under Candace the queen of the
Ethiopians, who had the charge of all her treasure, and had
come to Jerusalem for to worship, was returning', and sitting*
in his chariot, read Esaias the prophet."

Josephus in his second book against Apion says, * We
' choose not to imitate the institutions of other people : but
' we willingly embrace all that will follow ours.'2 But the
history which Josephusa has given us of Izates the king* of
the Adiabenes, who was converted to the Jewish religion
about the fortieth year of the Christian sera, will throw a great
deal of lig'ht upon this subject. And therefore 1 shall set
it here before the reader, though in as few words as I can.

4 About this time,' says Josephus, ' Helene the queen of

* the Adiabenes, and her son Izates, came over to the ob-

* servation of the Jewish customs. b It happened in this

* manner. Monobazus, king of the Adiabenes, fell in love

* with his sister Helene, and married her.' By this marriage
he had a son, whom he called Izates. ' But there was an
' elder son called Monobazus, whom he had by Helene, be-

* side other sons by other wives.' However it was apparent
to all, that Izates had his best affections, as if he had been
an only son. The rest of the sons therefore envied him.
The father was sensible of it : ' And therefore lest any

mischief should happen, having given Izates considerable
presents, he sent him to king Abennerigus, who resided in
a fortress called Spasina, entrusting him with the care of
his son. Abennerigus received him very civilly, and
married his daughter to him.'

Some time after this Monobazus the father dies: the
queen calls a council of her nobles, puts them in mind,
' that they knew the king her husband had appointed her

* son Izates his successor.' They came into these measures ;
Izates returned home, was received, and gained peaceable
possession of his father's kingdom.

' But whilst Izates resided in the fortress Spasina, a Jew-

* ish merchant, whose name was Ananias, who was wont to

* have access to the women of the court, [or the king's

* wives,] taught them to worship God according to the Jew-
' ish manner. By their means Ananias was introduced to

2 H/mg de ra /j,ev TMV aXXwv %r)\sv SK a£ia/uiA, T«f fitvToi
rjlJifTepwv fisXofJLtv&g ijSewg ctxoptOa. Cont. Ap. lib. ii. sect. 36.

a Ant. lib. xx. cap. 2. b Kara TSTOV tie TOV jcaipov TOJV

j3a<rtXi£ EXfvrjt KCII 6 TTO.IQ avrr]Q l£ar»;£ 6i£ ra Isdaiuv tOrj TOV fiiov
Xov, Sia raiavTriv airiav. Ibid. sect. 1.

The State of the Jews out of Judea. 121

* Izates, and brought over him likewise to the same senti-

* ments. It happened also that Helene was taught by an-

* other Jew, and came over to their laws.'c

' When Izates was returned and seated upon the throne,

* understanding that his mother was highly pleased with
' the customs of the Jews, he became extremely desirous to

* enter fully into them. And understanding that he could
' not be a perfect Jew unless he was circumcised, he was
' disposed to that also.'d His mother having had notice of
these his intentions, dissuaded him from it fearing it should
alienate his subjects, and provoke them to rebel. She also
informed Ananias what advice she had g'iven her son.
Ananias was of the same opinion with her, and told Izates,
that if he persisted in this design he must necessarily leave
him ; for the people would impute this action to him, and
it would not be safe for him to stay any longer in the
country. ' He told him moreover, " That he might worship

God without circumcision, if he did but fully determine
to follow the Jewish institutions. For this was more im
portant for essential] than circumcision."6 And having
assured nim that God would forgive him his not doing
what he declined only out of necessity, and for fear of his
subjects, the king for a time submitted to what he said.
However he had not wholly abandoned his design. And
some time after this another Jew named Eleazar, coming
thither out of Galilee, who was reckoned to be very
skilful in the laws, he brought him to perfect his design.
For when he came in to wait upon the king, he found him
reading the law of Moses. And thereupon addressed
himself to him in this manner: "You little think, O king,
how great an injury you offer to the laws, and in them to
God. For you ought not only to read the laws, but, in the
first place, to do the things which are enjoined by them.
How long do you remain uncircumcised ? If you have not
yet read the law concerning circumcision, read it now, that
you may know what impiety you are in." The king having

ov fie fcaipov 6 l£arjjg iv rqj STratrtve %apo^i £i£rpt/3«v, InCaiog rig
£j«7ropO£, Avaviag ovo/jia, Trpog Tag yvvaiKag ficrtaiv TS fSaaiXtwg, ediCaaicev
avrag TOV Gtov evatfltiv, wg Is^aiotg Trarpiov rjv' Kai Srj Si OVTOJV tig -yvwmv
atyiKopevog T<\) l£ary, Kq.Kf.ivov Ojuotwg avvavnrtiai -- <rvvt(3tf3r]Kti fit Kai rrjv
TUXtvrjv, o^oiw£ v^ £Tfp8 nvoQ Is&ais (Uctax&KTav, tig rag eKfii'wv /uera/ctKO^Kr-
Oat vofing. Ibid. sect. 4. d HvOo^ivog $f rrjv /z//repa rr\v eavrs TTCIVV

%aipav Toig Iu§aia)v tOtaiv, (.GTTtvae Kai avrog tig tKtiva furati/lko&at' vopiZwv
TS. fir) av tivai /3e/3atw£ Itidaiog, ti \it] Trtpirf/^voiro, TrparTtiv t\v trot/tog. Ibid.
sect. 5. e Aui/ajLicvov Ss .avrov, e<pr) Kai xwP'C TrlQ 7T£piro/i?jg TO

Seiov <ri(3tiv, ttye Travrwg KLKQIVS. %r)\av ret Trarpia rwv l&Saiwv' TSTO
TS frriTtvtaQqi. Ibid.

122 Credibility of the Gospel History.

t beard these words, deferred the thing* no longer, but going*
' into another chamber, and having called in a physician,
' performed the commandment/ Arid then sending for his

* mother, and the master Ananias, he told them, he had now
' done the work. They were immediately seized with an

* uncommon surprise and fear, lest, if this matter came to
' be public, the king should be in danger of losing his

* kingdom. But God suffered not those things to come to
' pass which they feared. For though Izates was in many
1 dangers, God preserved him and his sons, and opened a

* way for their safety, when they were compassed with diffi-
' culties; manifesting & thereby, that they who look up to
' him, and trust to him alone, do not lose the fruit of their
' piety.' h

This story may give occasion for many reflections. I put
the reader in mind of some of them only. We learn hence,
that the Jews did sometimes gain over persons of distinction
to their religion : we see here, in part, their methods of
gaining proselytes. Here appear two distinct sentiments :
Ananias did not absolutely insist upon circumcision, but
Eleazar did. And it seems somewhat probable, that Jose-
phus himself was on this side the question. Ananias dis
pensed with it only on account of a very great necessity :
Eleazar is represented as most skilful in laws: and in the
conclusion Josephus intimates, that Izates, by embracing
circumcision, had entitled himself to the special protection
of providence.

St. Luke expressly has called Nicolas a proselyte of Antioch.
I must therefore set down here one passage particularly
for his sake. Josephus, speaking of the Jews at Antioch,
says, ' They were continually bringing* over a great number

* of Greeks to their religion ; they made them also in some
4 measure a part of themselves.' *

f AXX' fl fJHf]7T(i) TOV 7T£pl TSTS VOflOV UVfyVUQ, IV tlfilJQ TiQ tTlV if a<T€(3(lCt,

vvv avayvwGc ravra aKavag o jSaaiXevg, «% vTTEpfiaXero ri\v 7rpa%iv, fiera^ag
£e «£ tTfpov otK^a, /cat TOV tarpov uGKciXtaantvoQ, TO 7rpo<ra%0£^ ETtXu' Kai
fieTa.Trtfi-il'ap'tvoQ TJJV Tf. fjirjTtpa, feat TOV PidacncaXov Avaviav, t(rrjfi.avev avrov
TreTTpaxtvai r soyov. Ibid. s ETrtFeiKvvQ on Toig u£ avTov aTro/SXtTretri,

<cai novip TrtTri^evKOffiv, 6 KOOTTOQ s»c a.7ro\\vTai o Tr]Q tvffffiticiQ. Ibid.

h And Josephus says, that afterward the king's brother Monobazus, and
many of his relations, observing Izates, for his piety to God, blessed above all
men, were induced to forsake their own rites and customs, and embrace those
of the Jews. Antiq. lib. xx. cap. 3. sect. 1. And several of Izates' sons and
brothers were within Jerusalem during the siege ; and, when the city was taken,
fell into the hands of Titus: who out of his great generosity gave them their lives,
but put them in chains, and carried them bound to Rome. De Bell. lib. vi. cap.
6. sect. 4. ' Aft T£ Traoffayofjitvoi TCLIQ Sp/jOTcaaif TTO\V TrXrjOoc; EXA>jva>v,

e rpo7r<>> TIVI fjioipav CIVTWV TrtTroirjvTo. De B. J. lib. vii. cap. 3. sect. 3.

The State of the Jews out ofjudea. 1 23

St. Luke has more than once spoke of women among the
Gentiles who were worshippers of God. When Paul was
at Philip pi, he says, Acts xvi. 14, " And a certain woman
named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira,k
which worshipped God, heard us." At Antioch in Pisidia,
Acts xiii. 50, " The Jews stirred up1 the devout and honour
able women — and raised persecution against Paul and Bar
nabas." From the history I have just now given of Izates's
conversion, it appears, that some women were brought to
approve of the Jewish customs, and to worship God after
the manner of the Jews. Josephus says moreover, that when
the men of Damascus, [in the year 66,] had formed a design
to make away with all the Jews of that place, ' They con-
' cealed their design very carefully from their wives, because
' all of them, except a very few, were devoted to the Jewish
' religion.'"1 It appears from a verse of Horace," that the
Jewish zeal in making proselytes was very extraordinary,
and much taken notice of: and they were censured0 as un
kind to all who were not of their own religion.

CHAP. IV.

CONCERNING THE JEWISH SECTS, AND THE SAMARITANS.

I. Of the principles of the Pharisees and Sadducees, and
their opposition to each other. II. The Sadducees mem
bers of the Jewish council. III. Of the Scribes and
Lawyers. IV. Of the Herodians not mentioned by Jo
sephus. V. Of the Essenes not mentioned by the Evan
gelists. VI. Of the Samaritans.

I. FROM the frequent mention of the pharisees and
sadducees in the gospels and Acts of the Apostles, it is
natural to conclude, that they were the prevailing sects

rov Qeov. l Tag

tie TO.Q favTdiv -yvvaiicag, airaaaq 7r\r]v oXiy<^v v

dio ntyi^og avroig aywv eytvero \adeiv IKZIVCIQ. De Bell. lib. 2. cap 20
sect. 2.

n - Ac, veluti, te,
Judaei, cogemus in hanc concedere turbam.

Lib. i. Sat. iv. v. ult.

' Non monstrare vias, eadem nisi sacra colenti ;
Quaesitum ad fontem solos deducere verpos.

JUVEN. Satyr, xiv. v. 103, 104.

124 Credibility of the Gospel History.

among the Jews at that time. This is agreeable to the ac
counts which Josephusa has given of the Jewish sects; and
will be evident from the particulars which will be taken
notice of presently.

The pharisees, Josephus says, ' were reckoned the most
' religious of any of the Jews, and to be the most exact and
' skilful in explaining the laws.'b In which he concurs
with St. Paul, who says, Acts xxvi. 5, " After the straitest
sect of our religion, I lived a pharisee." There is an agree
ment not only in the sense, but also in the expression.0

St. Mark says, ch. vii. 3, 4, " That the pharisees, and all
the Jews, except they wash, eat not, holding the tradition
of the elders : and many other things there be which they
have received to hold." And there is in the gospels fre
quent mention of the traditions of the elders. Joseph us says,
' The pharisees have delivered to the people many institu-

* tions as received from the fathers, which are not written in
' the laws of Moses.' d Whereas St. Mark says, " The pha
risees, and all the Jews, except they wash, eat not ;" his
expressions are extremely just. For Josephus adds, almost
immediately after the word just now cited from him, ' That
' the sadducees were able to draw over to them the rich only,

* the people not following them: for the multitude was with
' thee pharisees.'

In many parts of the gospels, and especially in the pro
secution of our Saviour before Pilate, the common people
appear to have been very much at the devotion of the pha
risees. It is evident from what has been already alleged
here from Josephus, that the people were usually on their
side. He has said the same thing in other places. ' They

* had (says he) such an influence on the multitude, that if
' they gave out any thing against a king or an high priest,
' they were credited.' f

According to the evangelists, they affected the direction
of public affairs, and very much abused the credulity of

a De B. J. lib. ii. cap. 8. sect. 14. Antiq. lib. xviii. cap. 1. sect. 2. et alibi.

b &api<Taioi (TWTay/jLa TI ludaiwv SOKSV tvcrffie^tpov tivat rotv a\\wv, icai
TSQ vofjing afepi/Sfrspov atyriyeiaQai. De B. J. lib. i. cap. 5. sect. 2.

c Kara T^V a/cpi/War??!' aipftrtv. Vid. et Joseph, in vit. sect. 38. p. 923.
— Trig St <J>api<raiwv atp£(7£u>f, 01 TTSOL TO. Trarpia vofiifj.a SOK&GI T
ctKpi/3£ia £ia0£p£iv. d On vo\ai\ia TroXXa riva iraptdoaav

01 4>api<Ttttoi c»c Trarfpwv haSo^riQ, aTTtp «K avayeypaTrrai iv roig
VO^OIQ. Antiq. lib. xiii. cap. 10. sect. 6. . e Twv p,ev 2a^«K:aiwv TSQ

£V7TOp8C flOVOV TTtlOoVTWV, TO C^£ £?7jUOri/COV &% €7TOjU6VOV CLVTOl£ l%OVTd)V, TWV

fie 4>rtpieraia»v TO 7r\r)9o£ av/jifia^ov t^oirwv. Ibid. f TcxravTrjv fie

iff-^vv Trapa T'j) TrXrjQti, WQ KO.I Kara /SacrtXcwc TI Xtyovrff, *cat Kara
, tvOvQ mrtvtffOai. Ibid. sect. 5.

Of the Jewish Sects. 125

the people, and the reputation they had for sanctity.
" They loved salutations in the market-places, and the chief
seats in the synagogues, and the uppermost rooms at feasts,
devoured widows' houses, and for a pretence made long"
prayers," Matt, xxiii. 14. Mark xii. 38—40. Luke xx.
46, 47.

And Joseph us allows, they did sometimes make an ill use
of the esteem they were in for piety. Alexandra, the widow
of Alexander Jannteus, had for some time the govern
ment of Judea. She being a * very religious woman,'
thought the pharisees might be her best counsellors: but

* they abusing her simplicity in this respect,' though on
other accounts she was a woman of very good capacity, ' got

* the management of all things into their own hands, con-

* demned or acquitted, punished or rewarded men accord-

* ing to their own pleasure ; in a word, she governed others,

* the pharisees governed her.'s

The pharisees and sadducees are plainly represented in
the gospels as very different from each other, and holding
in a manner opposite opinions. Josephus, in one place,
calls the sadducees, * the sect opposite to that of the phari
sees.'11 They did at some times join together in one and the
same design against our Saviour. Matt. xvi. 1. " The
pharisees also with the sadducees came, and tempting him,
desired him that he would shew them a sign from heaven."
At other times they attacked him separately, and endeavour
ed to ensnare or puzzle him with questions suitable to their
several schemes, Matt. xxii. 23— 34. We have one instance,
wherein their different principles drove them into very dif
ferent measures, and occasioned a downright quarrel. When
St. Paul was called before the council at Jerusalem, " and
perceived that the one part were sadducees and the other
pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I
am a pharisee — Of the hope and resurrection of the dead, I
am called in question. And when he had so said, there
arose a dissension between them : — for the sadducees say
that there is no resurrection, neither angel nor spirit : but
the pharisees confess both : And there arose a great cry.
And when there arose a great dissension, the chief captain,
fearing lest Paul should have been pulled in pieces of them,

8 TUTOIQ Trtpiaaov Ss TI TT^ocra^fv 77 AAtgavdpa (Te(3op,evr] Trepi TO Srtiov' 01
TTJV aTT\OTr]Ta rrjQ avOpwTrs Kara p,iKyov vwiovrtQ, r^r] tcai Sioticr/Tat T(DV
tyivovTO, diMKiiv rt KO.I KaTaytiv OVQ eQeXoiev, \veiv Tf. KO.I Seiv - €/epar£i fit
Toiv \nv aXXdiv O.VTT), <tapi(raioi cT avTtjg. De B. J. lib. i. cap. 5. sect. 2.

h 2ac^8Kaitov aip£<T£cu£, 01 TI\V tvavTiav rote <&api(raioif 7rpoaip£<riv
Ant. lib. xiii. cap. 10. sect.,6. in.

126 Credibility of the Gospel History.

commanded the soldiers to go down, and to take him by
force from among them, and to bring him into the castle,"
Acts xxiii. 6 — 10.

This will lead us to the consideration of some of their
distinguishing tenets. I shall, therefore, set down now the ac
count Josephus has given of their opinions concerning the
points mentioned in this text. Of the pharisees he says,
4 Moreover it is their belief, that there is an immortal power
' in souls, and that under the earth there are rewards and
1 punishments for those who in this life have practised vir-
' tue or vice ; and that to these [souls] there is appointed
' an eternal prison, but that to the former there is a power
' of reviving.'* In another place he says of them, ' That

* they believe every soul to be immortal, but that the

* soul of the good only passes into another body, and the soul
' of the wicked is punished with eternal punishment.' k On
the other hand he says : * It is the opinion of the sadducees,
4 that souls perish with the bodies.'1 And in another place,

* that they deny the continuance of souls, and the punish-
' ments and rewards of Hades.' m

It has been thought by some" that Josephus, in this ac
count of the pharisees, has endeavoured to accommodate
their sentiments to those of some of the Greek philosophers :
and that he here represents them as believing something very
much like the Pythagorean transmigration of souls. And
there seem to be in the New Testament the traces of some
such sentiment; particularly in some of the instances mention
ed, Matt. xvi. 14. " And they said, some say, that thou art
John the Baptist, some Elias, and others Jeremias, or one
of the prophets." Again it is said, " His disciples asked him,
saying, Master, who did sin, this man or his parents, that
he was born blind 1" John ix. 2.

Some0 think, that Josephus's words above mentioned are
altogether inconsistent with the notion of a transmigration,
and that they import the belief of a proper resurrection.
Possibly there were different sentiments concerning this

1 A.9ava.Tov rt tff%w raig \^v^aig TTI^IQ avroig tivai, Kai VTTO %9ovog

fftlQ T£ KOI TIJJLO.Q OIQ O.ptTr}Q TJ KUKlttg t7TlT1]?)f.VGLQ (.V T(j) ]8l<£> ytyQVt' KO.I TO.IQ

fiev ftjoy/itov aidiov 7rpo<ri0£<r0ai, TCLIQ de pa^tovijv TS avafiiav. Illis vero
facultatem esse in vitam redeundi. vers. Huds. Antiq. lib. xviii. cap. 1. sect. 3.

k tyvxrjv dt Trctffav \itv atyBapTov, iitTaflaivtiv de fig erepov crw/ia TIJV TWV
ayaQoiv \iovi\v^ rn]v It TUV 0aiAwi/ ai<5i^> ri/zwpip KoXa&aQai. De Bell. lib. ii.
cap. 8. sect. 14. ' ^aSfisKatoig de TaQ^vxctG o Xoyof avvafyaviZu TOIQ

ffwuaai. Ant. lib. xviii. cap. 1. sect. 4. ni ^v^ric, de ri\v Siapovriv,

Kai Tag KaO' d^a Tifiwptag KO.I rifiag avaip&(ri. JDe Bell, ubi supra.

n Vid. Grot, in Matt. xiv. 2. xxii. 28. Cleric. Hist. EC. Prolegom. sect. 1.
cap. 2. ° Basnage, Ann. Pol. Ecc. A. D. i. n. 12.

Of the Jewish Sects. 127

matter among those called pharisees. It may be, they had
none of them exactly that notion of a future state and re
surrection, which our Lord, and his apostles after him,
taught : for St. Paul says, 2 Tim. i. 10, that " Jesus Christ
had brought life and immortality to light through the
gospel."

However, St. Paul's notions did directly contradict those
of the sadducees, and favour and contirm, not to say im
prove, those of the pharisees, as is evident from Josephus's
account. And it is not at all wonderful, that one sect laid
hold of an advantage against the other.

Without staying any longer here, I shall give a passage
or two, in which Josephus, who was of the sect of the
pharisees, has represented some of his own sentiments con
cerning these points. The city of Jotapata, where Josephus
commanded, was now taken ; and he and some others had
hid themselves in a cave. He was for surrendering to
Vespasian ; the rest of the company were rather for killing*
themselves, and threatened to kill him if he did not come
into the same sentiment. In order to dissuade them from
this design, among other things, he says, ' All have mortal
4 bodies, formed of corruptible matter. But the soul is im-

* mortal, and being a portion of God, is housed in bodies.
' What ! know you not, that they who depart out of life ac-
4 cording to the law of nature, and return to God the debt
' they have received from him, when it is the will of him
' that gave it, have eternal praise, and durable houses and
; generations ; and that pure and obedient souls remain,

* having received an holy place in heaven, from whence,
' after the revolution of ages, they shall be again housed in
' pure bodies. But the souls of those who have laid violent
' hands on themselves, shall be lodged in the darkest
4 Hades.' i> If I mistake not, St. Paul's figures in 2 Cor. v.
1, 2, have a resemblance with these of Josephus. " For we
know, that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were
dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made
with hands, eternal in the heavens. For in this we groan
earnestly, desiring to be clothed upon with our house which
is from heaven."

P Ta JMV yt <r<s)[Jiara Srvrjra iraffi, KCII EK <p9aprtj£ vXqg SrjfuapyeiTai' tyv%ri $e

aQavarog a«, KO.I Ota p.oipa TOIQ <T(i)p,ao'iv ivoLKi&TaC apa SK ITC, on rwv fj,£v

t^iovTuv TS |8i8 Kara rov TTJQ tftvaiug vopov, KO.I TO XrjtyOev Trapa rs 0£« %peof
(KTivovTkJV, OTU.V 6 $8f K0fjiiffa(r9ai $f\r), K\£0£ fjifv aiwviov, OIKOI Se KO.I yeveat
/3f/3aioi, KaOapai Se KO.I virr]Kooi ptvsaiv at $vKai, xwPOJ/ spavs Xa^eo-ai TCJV
ayiwrarov, tvQev £K 7r£pirpo7r?7£ antivwv ayvoig TraXiv avrtvoiKi^ovrat
wrote; de fcaO' caurojv t^avrjaav at %apE£, T&TUV fitv aSrjs ^t^rai TUQ
De Bell. lib. iii. cap. 7. p. 1144, 1145.

128 Credibility of the Gospel History.

The pharisees are said in the gospels " to fast oft," Matt.
ix. 14 ; and Joseph us says, ' They practise great temperance,
' and never indulge themselves in a luxurious way of life.'i
This is as much as is reasonable to expect from him. It
was not proper to tell all the world, that they " fasted
twice in a week," from sun-set to sun-set, r Luke xviii. 12.
The Jews' fasting was one of those things which the Romans
had always ridiculed.8 And some thought they fasted on
their sabbaths;1 though that was a great mistake. Jose
ph us, however, cannot be much blamed for endeavouring
to give a good turn to what had been a foundation for many
unlucky jests.

I do not remember that the evangelists have any where
said expressly, that the sadducees rejected the tradition
of the elders ; but as these were the great concern of the
pharisees, and as these two sects seem opposite to each
other, I should think it very likely, even from the New
Testament, that the sadducees were not very fond of these
traditions ; and Josephus says it plainly. ' The pharisees
4 have delivered to the people many institutions as received

* from the fathers, which are not written in the laws of
' Moses. For this reason the sadducees u reject these things,

* saying, that those things are binding which are written,

* but that the things received by tradition from the fathers
' need not to be observed. And about these things there

* have happened many disputes and contentions.' And
again : ' They pretend not to observe any thing beside the
' laws ; and it is with them a virtue to contradict the mas-

* ters of wisdom, and wrangle with them about the science
' they teach.' v

II. But though these two sects stood thus, in a manner,
in opposition to each other, yet St. Luke represents them
both as concerned together in that administration of affairs,
which was allowed the Jewish nation by the Romans, to
whom they were then subject : and says, that the members
of the council, before which St. Paul was brought, were

OITS yap QapHTaioi TY\V fiiaiTav t&vrtXi^ycrij/, sdev tig TO /iaXajcwrcpov tv-
Ant. lib. xviii. cap. 1. sect. 3. r Buxt. Synag. Jud. cap. 30.

s Jejunia Sabbatariorum. Mart. lib. iv. Epigr. 4. * Ne Judaeus

quidem, mi Tiberi, tarn diligenter Sabbati jejunium servat, quam ego hodie
servavi. Suet. August, cap. 76. u Kai dia TUTO ravra TO Saddsicai

£K/3aXX«, \tyov tKtiva 8uv r/y£W0ac vojutjua ra yeypajU/Jtva, ra £' etc
fftwg riov TTttTtpuv pi] TripitV KCU Trepi TSTUV t^rjTrjffeig O.VTOIQ Kai
yivtaOai awtflaivt /ityaXaf. Ant. lib. xiii. cap. 10. sect. 6.
' v ^vXaKtjQ de sdafjuov Tivatv jtttraTroij^o'ig avroig r\ TWV vo/.za>v" TTOOQ yap TSQ
di8aGKa\8Q (To0ia?, qv [ttTiaffiv, a^iXoyfiv aperrjv apiOfjiaffiv. Ant. lib. xviii.
cap. 1 sect. 4.

Of the Jewish Sects. 129

" the one part sadducees, and the other pharisees," Acts
xxiii. 6. And we have, before this, mention made of a
council in which there was a good number of sadducees:
" Then the high priest rose up, and all they that were with
him, which is the sect of the sadducees," ch. v. 17.

And there is no reason to suspect that St. Luke has been
mistaken herein. The sadducees were not excluded from
public offices ; but in proportion to their numbers seem to
have had an equal share in the administration with the
pharisees. But the reader is to judge for himself from
what Josephus says. ' This opinion (speaking* of the sad-
* ducees) is embraced by a few only ; but then they are
' some of the chief men for dignity : however, they can do
4 but little ; for when they are in the magistracy, they gene-
' rally fall into the measures of the pharisees; (though un-
' willingly, and out of pure necessity ;) for otherwise they
' would not be endured by the multitude.' w He says like
wise, ' That they are the most cruel of all the Jews in their
' judicial sentences,' x which I think does appear also in some
instances in the Acts of the Apostles, where the pharisees
were for the milder sentence, and had a majority. How
ever these passages of Josephus plainly intimate that the
sadducees were not seldom in office.

The high priests themselves were sometimes sadducees.
John Hyrcanus, prince and high priest of the Jews, who
died in the year 107 before the Christian sera,? forsook the
pharisees upon a disgust and turned sadducee. ' He
abrogated the institutions which the pharisees had pre
scribed to the people, and punished those that observed
them. Hence the multitude conceived an aversion for
him and his sons. But having suppressed this disturbance,
he afterwards lived very happily ; and having administer
ed the government in an excellent manner one and thirty
years, he died, leaving behind him five sons.'2 There was
another instance of this about the year of our Lord 60.a

w Eig oXiyeg re avtfpag OVTOQ o Xoyog a^ifcero, rag fievrot Trpwrag TOIQ
a?iw/zaor 7rpa<r<T£rai re air avTO)v adtv, a>g tiireiV OTrore yap £TT' ap^ag
TrapeXQoitv, a<c8(Tia>g f.iev Kai fear' avayxrag, Trpoo^wpaoi £' sv oig o $apt<ratog
Xeyei, $ia TO jj-rj aXXwg aveKrag yeveerOat roig 7r\rjOe<nv' Ibid.

x Ant. 20. cap. 8. p. 896. v. 37. y Prideaux, Connect. Part II.

Book iv. p. 328. z MaXi<=ra de avrov e-rrnrapuZwev

Kai dif9t]Ktv oura>g, a><re Ty Sa^sKatwv TroiuaQai 7rpo<rGecr9ai
«I>apieraia>v a7ro<ravra, Kai rare VTT' awrwv /eara<ra0£»>ra vo/ujwa
KaraXutrai, Kai rag 0vXarrovrag avra KoXaerai* /u<rog av tvrtvQtv avry re Kai
Toig VIOIQ ?rapa TS 7r\r]9sg dieyevtro — Ypwavog ^e Traixrag TIJV Taoiv, Kai /ier'
avrrjv (Bunxjag eu^atj^ovwg, Kai Tt]v apxnv dtoiKrjaafjitvog TOV api^ov rpOTrov
tTfffiv evi Kai rpiaKovra, reXeur^c KaraXiTratv wisg Trei/re. Antiq. lib. xiii. cap.
10. sect. 6, 7. a Vid. Pagi. Crit. in Bar. et Basnage, An. P. E.

VOL. I. ,K

130 Credibility of the Gospel History.

1 Caesar having heard of the death of Festus sent Albinus
4 prefect into Judea ; and the king1 £sc. Agrippa the
* younger] took away the high priesthood from Joseph,
' and gave the succession of that office to Ananus the son
4 of Ananus. — This Ananus the younger, who, as we said
4 just now, had received the high priesthood, was fierce and
4 haughty in his behaviour, and above all men bold and
4 daring: and moreover was of the sect of the sadducees.'b

Many do suppose, that the high priest whom St. Luke
speaks of, Acts v. 17, as being of the sect of the sadducees,
was Caiaphas. but Josephus has said nothing concerning
Caiaphas's principles one way or other.

We may, as we pass along, observe here the agTeement
between the style of the evangelists and Josephus. The
people, as is evident, very generally held the tenets and
observed the traditions of the pharisees; yet they are
never dignified so far as to be called pharisees. They are
rather an appendage than a part of the sect, and are always
called very plainly the people, the multitude, and the like.
The title of pharisee seems to have been almost entirely
appropriated to men of leisure and substance. St. Augus
tine0 made the same observation long ago.

Again, St. Mark introduces our Saviour telling the pha
risees, ch. vii. 9, " Full well ye reject the commandment of
God that ye may keep your own tradition." So that in one-
respect a tradition might be the fathers5 and in another the
pharisees'. And afterward ; " Making the word of God of
none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered"
ver. 13. And, to add no more texts, 44 They" (the scribes
and pharisees) 44 bind heavy burdens and grievous to be
borne, arid lay them on men's shoulders," Matt, xxiii. 4,
Luke xi. 46. Here also the phrase and sense of the evan
gelists and Josephus agree together. In one of the passages
just transcribed from him he says, * The pharisees have de-
4 liver ed to the people many institutions :' in another he
speaks of the institutions which the pharisees had prescribed
to, or enjoined upon, the people.

III. There is in the gospels frequent mention of a set of
men called scribes and lawyers. They are often joined
with the chief priests, elders, and pharisees. They seem
to have been men of skill and learning, and to have

b O de vewrtpog AVO.VOQ, ov ri}v apxitpwGvvrjv {(papev TraptiXrjfavai, SpaavQ
r\v rov Tpoirov, Kai To\firjrt]g diaipfpovTtog' aiptaiv de peTyti rr\v Sa^8/c«twv*
Ibid. lib. xx. cap. 8. sect. 1. c Pharisaei illi Judsei erant, quasi

egregii Judaeorum. Nobiliores enim atque doctiores tune Pharisaei vocabantur.
Aug. Serm. 106. n. 2. T. v. Benedict.

Of the Jewish Sects. 131

had a particular deference paid to them on that account,
Matt. ii. 4. " And when he had gathered all the chief
priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of
them where Christ should be born ? — For he taught them as
one having authority, and not as the scribes," chap. vii. 39.
A passage or two of Josephus will explain these men's
characters. ' Whilst he (Herod in his last sickness) lay
' under these disorders, there happened a tumult among the

* people. There were in the city two sophists [or rabbies]
' who were reckoned exceeding skilful in the laws of their

* country, and for that reason were highly honoured

* throughout the whole nation, Judas the son of Sepphoreeus,
' and Matthias the son of Margalus. Not a few of the young

* men frequented them to hear them interpret the laws,
' and they had with them every day an army of the
< youth." d

Of this same affair he speaks thus in his Antiquities.

* There were Judas the son of Sariphaeus, and Matthias the
' son of Margalothus, men who had the most persuasive elo-
4 quence of any among the Jews, and were eminent inter-
' preters of the laws, and were dear to the people because
4 they taught the youth. These were daily frequented by
' those who gave themselves to the study of virtue.' e

Whether there be any difference between lawyers and
scribes, or whether they are words perfectly synonymous, I
cannot say. Perhaps some were chiefly employed in the
schools, and others usually spoke in public synagogues.

IV. It ought to be observed, that Josephus has given an
account of a third sect among the Jews which were called
Essenes: and on the other hand there is a sort of men
spoken of in the gospels of which Josephus has taken no
notice, namely, the Herodians.

As for the Herodians, they (or their leaven) are not often
mentioned in the New Testament ; I think not above four
times in all the gospels, Matt. xxii. 16. Mark iii. 6. viii. 15.
xii. 13. What their particular tenets were does not ap
pear to me, and I suppose it is not necessary I should set
down here all the conjectures of learned men concerning

d Avo rjffav <ro0i<rai Kara rrjv iroXiv, /uaXt^a SoicsvTee ctKpifisv ra 7rarpiat
feat Sia TSTO iv avavn rq eQvei /ityierr^e ij^icjfjifvoi SoKrjQ, laSag re viog

/ecu MarQiag erepog MapyaXs* THTOIQ UK oXiyoi irpoffijtaav
rjys/jLevoiQ TSQ vofj,&£, KCU avvrjyov oarjfjiepai TWV r)j3(t)VTt*)v <rparo-
De B. J. lib. i. cap. 33. sect. 2. e IsSaiwv Xoyiwrarot,

Kai Trap1 OVQ TIVCIQ ruv Trarpiwv «4'»?>>;rai vopuv, avSptQ KCU ^/*y 7rpo<r0iXfif &a
iraiStiav TS vewrtps' otr^jpai yap Sirjueptvov CLVTOIQ iravrtg oig
Antiq. lib. xvii. cap. 6. sect. 2.
K2

132 Credibility of the Gospel History.

them.f They might be a subdivision or branch of one of
the other sects, either of the pharisees or sadducees : or if
they were properly a distinct sect from the rest, it might
be a character that subsisted but a short time, at least un
der that name. From the time that prophecy ceased among"
the Jews new sects were continually arising. There were
two disciples of Antigonus Sochaeus that were the authors
of two new sects: Sadoc of the sect of the sadducees;
Baithos, or Bathus, the author likewise of a new sect which
had its name from him, and which is mentioned in the Ge-
mara,& though not in Josephus. There was likewise at this
time a division in the sect of the pharisees, some following
Hillel and others Shammai..11 The followers of Judas of
Galilee were at first but a small portion of the pharisees ;
in time they swallowed up almost all the other parties.
Josephus, who so often says that the sects of the Jews are
three, once or twice calls Judas of Galilee the leader or
head of a fourth sect/ The reason of his not always dis
tinguishing these from the rest was, I imagine, because they
differed from the pharisees only in some few particulars.
So that one and the same writer, who has professedly
reckoned up the Jewish sects according to different ways
of considering them, makes sometimes more and sometimes
fewer: much more may two different writers, though they
write professedly of this matter, which the evangelists have
not done.

And after all, perhaps, these Herodians were never pro
perly a distinct sect. Mr. Basnage, andk others, suppose
they were some of the officers of Herod, tetrarch of Galilee,
which came up to Jerusalem at the feasts, and who were
more devoted to the interests of the emperor than some of
the Jews : and therefore the pharisees persuaded some of
them to go along with their own disciples, when they sent
them to our Saviour with the question concerning the law
fulness of tribute. Their leaven might comprise several
things. Mr. Basnage supposes, that one thing meant by it,
might be a conformity to Roman customs in some points
which were forbidden the Jews.1 If this was the case, it is
not strange, that they are not particularly mentioned by
Josephus among the Jewish sects.

f Vid. St. Hieron. Matt. xxii. 15, 16. Prid. Conn. Part. ii. Book v. Reland.
Ant. Heb. p. 242, 263. Clerici Prolegom. ad Hist. Ecc. p. 15.

s Vid. Reland, ubi supra, p. 262. h See Dr. Prideaux's Connect.

Part. ii. Book viii. at the beginning. ' Ant. lib. xvii. p. 794. in.

k Vid. Poli Synops. Matt. xxii. 16. l Vid. Basnage, Ann. Polit.

Ecc. Vol. i. p. 293. n. 5. p. 318. n. 16. et passim.

Of the Jewish Sects. 133

The late learned Albert Fabriciusm supposed, that the
Herodians mentioned in the gospels, were the courtiers and
soldiers of Herod Antipas, tetrarch of Galilee ; and that
the name Herodians no more denotes a sect, than Csesareans
and Pompeians, or any such like name would do. And he
cites a passage of St. Jerom, which deserves to be remarked :
who even banters those, who thought the Herodians were
men who believed Herod the Great to be the Christ.

V. As for the Essenes not being mentioned by the evan
gelists, it was not their design to write the history of the
Jewish sects, but of our Saviour's ministry. And it is likely
this did not lead them to take any particular notice of them.
They were not very numerous. Josephus computes their
number at about four thousand; but I think, he means only
those of them that entirely rejected marriage.11 Philo says,
that in Syria and Palestine there were about four thousand
of them.0 As they were not very numerous, so they lived
very retired. Philo says, they sacrificed no living creatures,
and that they shunned cities. p Josephus says, they sent
presents to the temple, but offered no sacrifice there. 1 They
seem not therefore to have come much abroad ; and they
would not admit a man of another sect into the apartments
in which they lived. r In order to be admitted among them,
a year's probation was required without doors, that it might
be seen whether a person could bear their way of life.8

* The sect itself is divided into four classes, according to
' the time of their initiation. And the younger are reckoned

* so much inferior than the elder, that if any of these do but

* touch one of a junior class, they wash themselves, just as

m Herodem magnum tribuisse nomen sectae Herodianorum contendunt viri
doctissimi, prgeeunte Epiphanio, haeresi, xx. et Niceta, lib. 1. Thesauri, c. 34.
Verum Herodiani, Matt. xxii. 16. Marc. iii. 6. xii. 13, fuere ministri vel milites
Herodis Antipae, qui Johannem Baptistam interfecit, et Herodis magni filius
fuit. Nee magis haeresin vel sectam significat ibi hoc nomen, quam
Cgesareanorum, Pompeianorum, et similia. S. Hieronymus, ad Matt. xxii.
Mittunt igitur Pharisee! discipulos suos cum Herodianis, id est, militibus
Herodis; seu quos illudentes Pharisaei, quia Romanis tributa solvebant,
Herodianos vocabant, et non divino cultui deditos. Quidam Latinomm
ridicule Herodianos putant, qui Herodem Christum esse credebant ; quod
nusquam omnino legimus.' Vid. Fabric, ad Philastr. de Haer. cap. 28.
" P. 793. ° Quod omnis Probus liber, p. 876, C. D.

p Ov %wa KaraQvovTeg' Ibid. q Etg Se TO tepov avaOrjfiara TI

ovTt£, Qvaiag OVK tTrireXaat' K. T. \. Antiq. L xviii. cap. 1. sect. 5.
Kai \LITCL ravrr\v TIJV ayvtiav tiQ idiov oiKr}/j,a avviaaiv, tvQa fiijSsvi TWV
wv eTTiTtrpcurTat TraptXfleiv. De Bell. lib. ii. cap. 8. p. 1061. v. 25.
He '£TJ\&VTI TI\V aiptaiv avrwv a/c evOvg 77 Trapo^Of, aXV £?r' tvtavrov
fiivovTi rr\v avri)v viroTiOevrai diairav. Joseph, ibid. p. 1062. v. 18,

r

134 Credibility of the Gospel History.

* they would do if they had conversed with a stranger of
' another nation.'1

Is it any wonder, that the evangelists had no particular
occasion to mention this private set of men in writing the
life of our Saviour ? John xviii. 19, 20, " The high priest then
asked Jesus, of his disciples and of his doctrine. Jesus
answered him ; I spake openly to the world, I ever taug'ht
in the synagogue, and the temple, whither the Jews always
resort : and in secret have I said nothing." This is one of
the glories of our Saviour's character, as it is our very great
happiness, that what he said and did was public. These
men would not come to him ; and it would have been a
disparagement for him to have gone to them. It is, I think,
a just observation of Dr. Prideaux, ' that almost all that is
' peculiar in this sect, is condemned by Christ and his
' apostles.'" And that is sufficient for us.

Sir John Marsham has strongly represented the obscuri
ty of this sect in a passage, which I shall place in thev
margin.

VI. We may not improperly subjoin the Samaritans to
the Jewish sects.

In the discourse that passed between our Saviour and the
woman of Samaria, she tells him, " our fathers worshipped
in this mountain," John iv. 20. And Josephus says, that
' mount Gerizim (the same the woman here speaks of) is
' by them esteemed the most sacred of all mountains.' w

The Jews and Samaritans appear to have had a very
great aversion and contempt for each other. John iv. 5— 0,
" Then cometh he to a city of Samaria. Now Jacob's well
was there. There cometh a woman to draw water. Jesus
saith unto her, Give me to drink. For his disciples were
gone away unto the city to buy meat. Then saith the
woman of Samaria unto him, How is it, that thou, being a

1 Aiijprjvrai fie, Kara ^povov affKrjfftwg, tig juoipctf rtaffapaq' Kai roffsrov 01

KaOaTrcp aXXo0vX<£) avfjKjtvpevrag. Ibid p. 1063. v. 32 — 34.
u Connect. Part ii. Book v. p. 364. v Esseni autem

bffioTrjTOQ, a sanctitate nominati, KW/XW^OV oiicsai, raq TroXag
vicatim habitant, urbes fugiunt. Philo, Probus liber, p. 876. C. D. Gens sola,
sine ulla fcemina, sine pecunia, socia palmarum. Plin. 1. v. c. 17. a populorum
frequentia separata ; adeo ut non mirum sit, tantum esse de iis silentium in
Evangeliis, cum essent illi Hierosolymis peregrini et ignoti. Neque rab-
binorum quispiam eorum Hebraice meminit, ante Zacuthium, scriptorem
nuperum. [A. D. 1500.] Marsh. Can. Chr. Ssec. ix. p. 157, 158. Franeq.
1696. w KfXftKor CTTI TO Fapi^etv opo£ avrip Gvvf\9e.iv> 6 ayvorarov

Tf. avroiQ opwv vTreiXrjTrrai. Antiq. lib. xviii. cap. 5. sect. 1.

Of the Samaritans. 135

Jew, askest drink of me which am a woman of Samaria ?
for the Jews have no deal ings x with the Samaritans.

It seems that the Jews were wont to take up provisions
at their own cost of the Samaritans, as they passed through
their country ; and therefore the disciples made no scruple
to go into the city to buy what they wanted. And it is
likely, that as Judea and Samaria were now both under
one and the same government, namely that of the Romans,
there was so good order preserved, that necessary accommo
dations should not be ordinarily refused any travellers,
upon their paying the full value of them. But these peo
ple scorned to ask or receive a favour of each other, even
so small a kindness as a draught of water. Our Lord did
not think himself bound by the rules they followed, as he
was not moved by the passions with which they were pos
sessed. But this woman was not a little surprised, that He,
being a Jew, should ask drink of her that was a Samaritan.
They all knew how they stood affected to each other.
The enmity betwixt them must have been the greatest that
can be conceived. Doubtless those Jews gave our Saviour
the most opprobrious language, which the most furious re
sentment could suggest, when " they said unto him, Say
we not well, that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil ?"
John viii. 48.

It is certain, the animosity between these people had ever
been very great, and new affronts and injuries had increased
it about this time. Josephus has related a particular pro
vocation, which the Samaritans gave the Jews, A. D. 8,
or 9.

* When Coponius governed in Judea, an affair happened

' that deserves to be mentioned. At the feast of unleavened

bread, which we call the passover, it was the custom of the

priests to set open the gates of the temple at midnight.

Soon after they had been opened, some Samaritans, who

had come privately into Jerusalem, entered in and threw

dead men's bones in the porticoes ; for which reason the

priests ever after guarded the temple more strictly.' y

The conversation which our Lord had with the woman of

K Cuthaei Csesarienses interrogaverunt R. Ahhuc. Patres vestri usi sunt
patribus noslris : vos igitur quare non utimini nobis ? DLxit ipsis, Patres vestri
non corruperunt opera sua : vos corrupistis opera vestra. Talm. Hieros. apud
Buxtorf, Lex. Thalm. p. 1370. y KWTTWVIS fa rr\v Isdaiav SitTrovrog,

rafa Trpaffaerai, TWV aZufjiwv TTJQ fopn;£ ayop,t.vi]g, t'/v Haa^a KaX&fiev, fK

fjisffijG VVKTOQ tv eOti roif itpevcriv ijv avoiyvvvai T& iep& TSQ irvXdJvag' icai rorc
sv ETTU TO Trpwrov yivETai ?} CLVOI£,IQ CLVT&V, avdptc; 2a/zap£irai, icpvtya. eig
lepoaoXv/jia. tXQovTtg, Siappi-^iv avQpwirfiuv o^twv tv raiQ <roai£
Antiq. lib. xviii. cap. 2. sect. 2.

136 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Samaria, happened as he was going from Jerusalem to
Galilee. " He left Judea, and departed again into Galilee.
And he must needs go through Samaria," John iv. 3, 4.
And St. Luke has given us an account of an affront our
Saviour met with in that country at another time, when he
was passing through it to one of the feasts at Jerusalem.
This may incline us to suppose, that as this was the
shortest way, so it was usual for the Jews of Galilee to go
this way up to their feasts. Josephus has assured us it was
so. The story in which this is mentioned being remarkable,
I shall set it down at length. The fact happened about the
year of our Lord 52. z

' Moreover a difference arose between the Samaritans and
the Jews upon this occasion. It was the custom of the
Galileans, who went up to the holy city at the feasts, to
travel through the country of Samaria. As they were in
their journey, some of the village called Ginsea, which
lies in the borders of Samaria and the great plain, falling
upon them, killed a great many of them. When the chief
men of Galilee heard what had been done, they went to
Cumanus, (he was then procurator,) and desired that he
would reveng'e the death of those men that had been kill
ed. But he having been bribed by the Samaritans, paid
no regard to them.?a

This passage gives light to what is said, Luke ix. 51.
" And it came to pass, when the time was come that he
should be received up, he stedfastly set his face to go up to
Jerusalem. And sent messengers before his face, and they
went, and entered into a village of the Samaritans, to make
ready -for him. And they did not receive him, because his
face was as though he would go up to Jerusalem." It
was upon this people, that some of our Saviour's disciples
were for commanding fire to " come down from heaven to
consume them." Our blessed Lord rebuked his disciples :
but it is evident, both from the evangelists and Josephus,
that however this people might treat other travellers, or
even Jews at other times, they were very apt to violate the
common laws of civility and hospitality toward those that
were going to worship God at Jerusalem, or that had been
there upon that account.

z Vid. Cleric. Hist. Eccl. * Antiq. lib. xx. cap. 5. sect. 1. Vid. et

de Bell. lib. ii. cap. 12. sect. 3.

Jewish Expectations of the Messiah. 137

CHAP. V.

OF THE JEWS' AND SAMARITANS' EXPECTATIONS, AND
THEIR IDEA OF THE MESSIAH.

I. The Jews had expectations of the Messiah, as a tem
poral deliverer. II. Of the Jews requiring a sign. III.
The Samaritans expected the Messiah. IV. The Jews
and Samaritans supposed the Messiah to be a prophet as
well as a king. V. Som,e reflections.

I. TWO things are plainly intimated by the evangelists ;
that the Jewish nation had, about the time of our Saviour,
very general expectations of the coming of the Messiah ;
and that the idea they formed of him, was that of a power
ful and victorious temporal prince.

First, It is intimated, that they had very general expec
tations of the Messiah. " The Jews sent priests and Levites
from Jerusalem, to ask him, (John the Baptist,) who art
thou ? and he confessed and denied not : but confessed, I
am not the Christ. And they asked him, what then ? — and
they which were sent were of the pharisees, John i. 19 — 24.
And as the people were in expectation, and all men mused
in their hearts of John, whether he were the Christ or not,"
Luke iii. 15. See ch. ii. 25, 26, John iv. 25.

Secondly, It is intimated, that the idea the Jews then
had of the Messiah, was that of a powerful temporal prince.
The disciples of Christ had these apprehensions ; therefore
there " arose a reasoning among them, which of them should
be greatest," Luke ix. 46. This notion was the ground of
that petition presented to our Saviour by the mother of
Zebedee's children : " Grant that these my two sons may
sit, the one on the right hand, and the other on the left in
thy kingdom," Matt. xx. 21.

The common people, whenever they had formed a great
idea of Jesus, from what he said or performed, continually
betrayed expectations of his assuming some external marks
of royalty, and very forwardly offer him their service, John
vi. 14, 15. This was the intention of those acclamations
they made, and of that solemn state, with which they at
tended him at last into Jerusalem ; the circumstances of
which are related by all the four evangelists : Matt. xxi. 8,

136 Credibility of the Gospel History.

9, " And a very great multitude spread their garments in
the way ; others cut down branches from the trees, and
strewed them in the way; and the multitude that went
before, and that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna to the
Son of David." John xii. 13, " Blessed is the King that
cometh in the name of the Lord." The acclamations, and
the ceremonies they used, sufficiently declare their mean
ing. When Jehu had been anointed king, 2 Kings ix. 13,
they that were with him " hasted, and took every man his
garment and put it under him, and blew the trumpet say
ing, Jehu is kirig."a

These were their expectations, this the notion they had of
the Messiah ; as is evident from the many impostors b which
arose about this time in Judea ; all which, according to Jo-
sephus, gained many followers. But as several passages
concerning them will appear in other parts of this work, and
one or two by and by in this chapter, 1 shall take no farther
notice of them in this place. There are passages of divers
ancient writers, in which these things are expressly assert
ed. Most of them have been already offered to the world
in our own language; but nevertheless they cannot be
omitted here.

One is in Josephus. ' But that which principally encou-
' raged them to the war, was an ambiguous oracle, found
6 likewise in the sacred writings, that about that time, some
' one from their country should obtain the empire of the
6 world. This they understood to belong to themselves.0
1 And many of the wise men were mistaken in their jndg-
6 ment of it. For the oracle intended Vespasian's govern-
6 ment, who was proclaimed emperor in Judea.'(1

There are two heathen historians, who have mentioned
this same thing. Suetonius in his life of Vespasian says,
' There had been for a long time, all over the east, a notion
6 firmly believed, that it was in the fates, [in the decrees or
4 books of the fates,] that at that time, some which came out
' of Judea, should obtain the empire of the world. By the
6 event it appeared, that prediction related to the Roman

a Joseph. Antiq. lib. ix. cap. 6. sect. 2. b See the Bishop of

Coventry and Litchfield's Defence of Christianity, chap. i. particularly p. 29,
first edit. c For this they had received (by tradition) that it was

spoke of one of their nation. Bishop of Cov. Defence, p. 26.

d To dt e-n-apav O.VT&Q jua\i<ra Trpog rov Tco\e^ovt qv %p^(r/io^ afttyifioXog
dfjLoitoQ tv TOIQ upoig tvpijp.£vo£ ypanfj.a(m>, we Kara TOV iccupov tKtivov cnro Tjjg
^wpag TIQ avTwv ap%ti TI]Q oiKs^.f.vi]Q' TSTO 01 fjiev <i>f OIKUOV e4Aa/3oi>, KO.I
TroXXoi TO)V ffo<f)(i)v tTrXavrjOrjaav Trtpi rrjv KpiGiv' f.dt)\& 5' apa Trtpi rrjv Oveff-
frafnavs TO Xoyiov Yiyt^ioviav, a.7roSti%9ivTOQ (.TTL Is^aiae avroicpaTopoQ. Jos.
de Bell. lib. vi. cap. 5. sect. 4.

Jewish expectations of the Messiah. 139

' emperor. The Jews applying" it to themselves went into a
6 rebellion.'®

What Tacitus says is much to the same purpose. Having1
related many calamities of the Jews, and divers prodigies
that preceded the destruction of Jerusalem, he gx>es on :
The generality had a strong persuasion, that it was set
down in the ancient writings of the priests, that at that
very time the east should prevail ; and that some who
came out of Judea should obtain the empire of the world.
Which ambiguities foretold Vespasian and Titus. But the
common people, according to the usual influence of human
passions, having once appropriated to themselves this
vast grandeur of the fates, could not be brought to under
stand the true meaning by all their adversities.'f
There is a passage or two more, which I would give here,
and which appear to me very material : they are the words
of Celsus, who flourished not long- after the middle of the
second century. They are cited by Origen, from Celsus's
books against the Christian religion, in a good part of which
he argued in the character of a Jew. ' How could we,'
says he, ' who had told all men there would come one
from God, who should punish the wicked, despise him if
he camel's And in another place he says, ' The prophets
say, that he who is to come is great, and a prince, and
lord of all the earth, and of all the nations, and of
armies.' h

Beside these, there is another passage in Josephus,1 which,
I think, deserves a particular attention. It must be pro
duced hereafter, uponk another occasion, and for that I
reserve it.

II. The evangelists have related many wonderful works,
of various kinds, which were performed by our Saviour.
And in some places they say, he wrought signs. " And
many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his

e Percrebuerat Oriente toto vetus et constans opinio, esse in fatis, ut eo tern-
pore Judaea profecti rerum potirentur. Id, de Imperatore Romano, quantum
eventu postea predictum paruit, Judaei, ad se trahentes, rebellarunt. Cap. iv.

f — Pluribus persuasio inerat, antiquis sacerdotum literis contineri, ut vales-
ceret Oriens, profectique Judsea rerum potirentur. Quse ambages Vespasianum
ac Titum praedixerant. Sed vulgus, more humanse cupiditatis, sibi tantam
fatorum magnitudinem interpretati, ne adversis quidem ad vera mutabantur.
Tacit. Hist. lib. v. cap. 13. « Ucjg Se, Qrjcnv, -f^itiQ 01 navi avQpu-

TTOIQ §r]\a><Ta.VT£(; rj%tiv airo 6f a TOV KoXaffovra TSQ adiicsc;, t\9ovTa aTtfia^ofiev ;
Or. con. Cels. lib. i. p. 61. Ed. Cant. 4to. h On ptyav /cat

dvva^rjv KO.I TTCKTIJQ TTJQ yt]^, Kcti Travruv TUV tOvuv KO.I -rparoTTt&ov KVOIOV
Qacriv 01 7rpo0rjrat tivai TOV ETriSr]p,rjffovTa. Id. lib. ii. p. 78.

1 Ant. lib. xvii. cap. x. sub. fin. k See Josephus in the Index,

his account of a terrible execution at Jerusalem.

140 Credibility of the Gospel History.

disciples," John xx. 30. And St. Peter tells the Jews,
Acts ii. 22, " that Jesus was a man approved of God among
them by miracles, and wonders, and signs, which God did
by him in the midst of them." But yet, they assure us, that
notwithstanding this, the Jews would be often asking him
for a sign. Matt. xii. 38, " Then certain of the scribes and
of the pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a
sign from thee." The sadducees also had this demand to
make ; ch. xvi. 1, " The pharisees also with the sadducees
came, and tempting him, desired him, that he would shew
them a sign from heaven." Again, John vi. 30, " They
said unto him, What sign shewest thou then that we may
see and believe thee?" The sign they wanted must needs
have been of a different kind from any of those which Je
sus had given them. The words that follow, ver. 31, are
somewhat remarkable : " Our fathers did eat manna in the
desert, as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to
eat." And the apostle Paul, a good while after this, says,
" the Jews require a sign," 1 Cor. i. 22.

A short passage or two from Josephus will confirm and
explain this matter. Representing the state of affairs in
Judea under Felix, he says, ' And deceivers and impostors,1
' under a pretence of divine inspiration aiming at innova-
' tions and changes, persuaded the people into distraction,
' and drew them into the wilderness, where they assured
' them God would show them signs of liberty.' This is in
his Jewish War. In his Antiquities he writes thus of the
same affair : ' And impostors and deceivers persuaded
' the multitude to follow them into the wilderness. For
* they said they would there show them manifest wonders
' and signs, which would be wrought by the power [or
' providence] of God.'m This shows they wanted some
sign of liberty, or of a temporal deliverance.

III. According to St. John the Samaritans also had at
this time expectations of the Messiah. " The woman saith
unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called
Christ : when he is come he will tell us all things. Jesus
saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he. — The woman
went her way into the city, and saith to the men, Come see
a man which told me all things that ever I did ; is not this

1 HXavoi yap av0pw7roi icai aTrarewi/te, Trpoo-^jMan Sfiafffjis, v£Ojr£pi<TjU8£ icai
juera/3oXa£ TrpaypaTtvoptvoi, Saiftovav TO TT\t]QoQ avfireiOov, KO.I Trpoyyov

eprjfjiiav, tl>£ £K£i 78 9f8 ^(.i^avTOQ avTOiQ Grjptia fXtvOepiat;. De B. J. lib.
ii. cap. 13. sect. 4. n; Ot £t yor\TtQ KO.I cnraTfwvtc avflpwTroi rov QX\OV

t7rei9ov avTOiq HQ rrjv eprjfuav t-rrtaQaC £ti%tiv yap ttyaaav tvapyr] rtpara /cat
<r?7/i«a, Kara rr\v TS Qes Trpovotav yevofj^va. Antiq. lib. XX. cap. 7. sect. 6

Samaritan expectations of the Messiah* 141

the Christ? Now when the Samaritans were come unto
him — and had heard him, they said unto the woman, Now
we believe, not because of thy saying- ; for we have heard
him ourselves, and know that this is the Christ the Saviour
of the world," John iv. 25, 26, 29, 42.

This supposition is confirmed by an account which Jose-
phus has given of an affair which happened in the latter
end of Pilate's government, A. D. 35, or 36. * Nor were
the Samaritans,' says he, ' free from disturbance. For
there was among them a man who made no scruple of a
lie, and contrived all he said so as might best please the
people. He published orders that they should meet toge
ther and go with him up to mount Garizim, which is
esteemed by them the most holy of all mountains. He
assured them that when they were got to the top of it, he
would shew them the sacred vessels which had been laid
up there underground by" Moses. They, taking* what he
said for truth, armed themselves, and posting themselves
in a certain village called Tirathaba, there received all
that flocked to them, intending to ascend the mountain in
a large body. But a detachment of Pilate's soldiers, horse
and foot, having first intercepted their passage, fell upon
them in the village, and at the first attack slew some, dis
persed others, and took a good number prisoners, the chief
of whom Pilate put to death.'

This affair is a proof that the Samaritans were now in ex
pectation of some extraordinary events. This deceiver ac
commodated his speeches to the humour and sentiments of
the people, and they credited readily what he said. But
this is not all : the substance of his promises is a proof they
were now in expectation of some discoveries and regulations
concerning matters of religion. For certainly if they found
these sacred vessels, they supposed they should have some
instructions also what to do with them. Nor could they
think him an ordinary prophet that should be honoured
with such a commission.0

n OVK aTTT]\\aKTo <$£ Sropvfis KCU TO Scf/zapfwv tOvOQ' ffv^ptrpti yap O.VT&Q avtjp
sv oXiy^ TO tytvdog TiQifjitvoQ, KUI t<f> rjdovy TTJQ ir\r]Qvoq Tt^va'^v TO. iravTct,
Kt\eva)v tTTi TO Tapi&tv opog avTip avvt\9tiv, 6 ayvoTaTov re CLVTOIQ opwv
uTraAjjTrrai, iffxvptZfTo Te TrapaytvojitvoiQ dei£tiv ra itpa aictvr] ryde /caropw-
pvyfitva, Ma>u(T£(0£ Tyde avruv 7roi);<Ta/i£V8 KaTaOtaiv' 01 fa tv b-rrXoig Tt year,
TriQavov fft&ntvoi TOV \oyoV KO.I KaQusavTtQ iv TIVI Kw/iy, TipaGafia Xsyerai,
7rapt\an(3avov TSQ nnav\\iyofJitvBQ, wg peyaXq) 7r\»j0si TIJV avafiacnv tig TO
opOQ 7ro»j(Tojw£voi- <j>Qavti Sf lliXctTog rrjv avodov UVTWV 7rpoKaTa\af3ofjitvoQ
nnrtMVTt "Trofnry KO.I OTrXtrwv, 01 av^aXovTtq TOig tv rg Kw/jy TrpocrvvrjOpoiff-
ptvoiQ, 7rapara££W£ jtvofjitvtjg, r«f ptv tKTtivav, TUQ St tig (pvyt]v rptTro^rat,
?wypia Tt TroXXse rjyov, wv TSQ Kopv^aiorarac - tKTtivt HtXaroe. Antiq.
lib. xviii. cap. 5. sect. 1. ° See Bishop Chandler's Defence of Christianity,

142 Credibility of the Gospel History.

I must inform the reader, that in all our present copies of
Josephus, the hiding these sacred vessels is ascribed to
Moses. And his name was read in this place by Epipha-
nius and Zonaras.P But Reland suspected that for Moses
we ought to read Ozes. One of his reasons is, that in an
ancient Samaritan chronicle, the manuscript of which he
had in his possession, there is an account of the laying up
of sacred vessels by the divine appointment in a cave on
Mount Garizim, during the high priesthood of Ozes, or Ozi :
but that, when afterwards he came to look for them, he
could not find them. Reland is inclined to think, that
the high priest here intended is Uzzi, mentioned, 1 Chron.
vi. 6, who was the fifth from Aaron. The story related in
his Chronicle is almost the very same which is told in the
second book of Maccabees, ch. ii. with scarce any other
difference but that of Jeremy for Ozi, and Nebo for Gari
zim. ^ I shall therefore set down here the account in the
Maccabees. It is, I think, an argument that according to
traditions which they then had among them, the discovery
of the sacred vessels would be immediately followed by
very glorious times ; and consequently that this passage
from Josephus is to the purpose for which I have alleged it.
2 Mace. ii. 4 — 8, " It was also contained in the same writing,
that the prophet being warned of God, commanded the
tabernacle and the ark to go with him, as he went forth
into the mountain, where Moses climbed up, and saw the
heritage of God. And when Jeremy came thither, he found
an hollow cave wherein he laid the tabernacle and the ark,
and the altar of incense, and so stopped the door. And
some of those that followed him came to mark the way, but
they could not find it. Which when Jeremy perceived, he
blamed them, saying : As for that place it shall be unknown
until the time that God gather his people again together,
and receive them unto mercy. Then shall the Lord shew
them these things, and the glory of the Lord shall appear,
and the cloud also as it was shewed under Moses, and as
when Solomon desired that the place might be honourably
sanctified."

IV. It has been shown that the Jews had now expecta
tions of the coming of the Messiah, and that they hoped for
a temporal salvation from him. But it is not to be thought
they looked for nothing else. After the miracle of the five
loaves, St. John says, chap. vi. 14, 15, " Then these men,

chap. 1. sect. 3. at the end. P Vid. Hudson. Notas in Joseph, loc.

q Substitue pro Jeremia Ozin, pro monte Nebo Garizim ; caetera conveniunt,
Reland. Dissert, de Monte Garizim, sect. 14.

Samaritan Expectations of the Messiah. 143

when they had seen the miracle which Jesus did, said, This
is of a truth that prophet which should come into the world.
When Jesus therefore perceived that they would come and
take him by force, to make him a king", he departed again
into a mountain himself alone." These two characters
therefore of a prophet, and a king, were joined together in
the thoughts of these men.

The woman of Samaria likewise plainly supposes the
Messiah was to be a great prophet. She knew that when
he who is called Christ was come, he would " tell them all
things." Upon Jesus " telling her all things that ever she
did," she concluded he was " the Christ." And she sup
posed this would be an argument with the men whom she
went to, to believe the same thing : and we find it had great
weight with them, though they were farther confirmed by
what they afterwards heard from Jesus themselves. The
expectation of great discoveries in matters of reljgion ap
pears also in the passage just transcribed from Josephus.

V. I choose to conclude this chapter with some re
flections.

1. We may now perceive one reason why our Blessed
Lord often forbad men to publish the cures he had wrought
upon them; why he so often moved from one place to an
other ; why he so rarely affirmed in express terms, in the
hearing of the people, that he was the Christ. Whilst they
had so strong a persuasion that the Messiah would be a tem
poral deliverer, there was a necessity for this conduct. It was
impossible otherwise to avoid giving* umbrag*e to the Roman
government, and to hinder the people from actually making-
attempts that would have exposed them to justice. He
therefore contented himself with declaring that the king
dom of heaven was at hand, that the Father had sent him,
that he was he of whom Moses and the prophets had writ
ten, that he was blessed who should not be offended in him ;
(all which they knew to be characters of the Messiah;)
wrought miracles, preached righteousness, and endeavoured
to correct their false sentiments and corrupt affections. In a
word, it was necessary he should do just as he did, according
to the divine character he sustains throughout the gospels.

2. We see here the ground of the different respect which
seems to have been shown to John the Baptist and Jesus.
" Many of the pharisees and sadducees came to his bap
tism," Matt. iii. 7. And of others there seems to have been a
general resort. And for some time afterwards it was dan
gerous to deny the validity or authority of his baptism :
" for all held John to be a prophet," Matt, xxi. 26. The

144 Credibility of the Gospel History.

general expectation of the Messiah raised their attention to
John : but their particular idea of the Messiah disgusted
them against Jesus. " He" (says our Lord to them) " was
a burning* and shining light, and ye were willing for a sea
son to rejoice in his light," John v. 35. They had no doubt
but that a very great person was coming among them ; and
they were pleased to hear John say that he was his fore
runner : but when Jesus came, he was not such a person as
they wished for.

2. We see here the reason of the different reception given
to Jesus by the pharisees and the people. The same no
tions seem to have been common to all, and the passion of
the people for liberty was as warm as that of the pharisees
for power and grandeur. But the people could not see very
far ; and they hoped, even contrary to present appearances,
that Jesus might some time undertake the deliverance they
wanted. But the pharisees, who had more penetration, saw
from the beginning that he was a man void of all worldly
ambition, and that no such principle would be gratified un
der him. His peculiar blessings were all bestowed on the
" poor in spirit, the meek, and those that were persecuted
for righteousness sake :" he exhorted " men to pray, fast,
give alms in secret," to entertain " the poor, the maimed,
the halt, the blind," in hopes of being " recompensed at the
resurrection of the just :" and he openly neglected " the
traditions of the elders." They could be sure from hence,
that Jesus did not intend to enrich his followers by worldly
conquests ; that this doctrine was no prelude to an univer
sal temporal empire ; and that according to these measures
their da'rling principles, instead of prevailing, would be for
ever disgraced. Therefore these men pursued him, almost
universally, from first to last, with an uninterrupted course
of secret or open malice.

4. This notion of theirs gives us the reason why many
owned Jesus " for a time," and then forsook him. They
came in to him upon the supposition of his being a tempo
ral deliverer of the Jewish nation : but by his conduct, or
some things they heard from him, they were convinced they
had gone upon a wrong foundation.

5. It does also account for that sudden change in the
people at the conclusion of our Saviour's ministry. They
attend him with great state into Jerusalem ; and a few days
after they cry out, " not this man, but Barabbas." The
reason seems to be this : his not assuming then the charac
ter of a temporal prince, or at least not giving them some
sign of liberty, had been a vast disappointment, and left a

Samaritan Expectations of the Messiah. 145

deep resentment, which rendered them susceptible after
wards of the worst impressions from the chief priests and
pharisees.

6. The particulars above mentioned may help us to con
ceive the truth of what is related, Acts v. 26. " Then went
the captain with the officers, and brought them without
violence ; for they feared the people, lest they should have
been stoned." Strange ! that they should now have such a
zeal and affection for the disciples of Jesus, whom they
had so lately desired with loud voices to be crucified, as to
be ready to do violence to the officers of the council for
their security. But however strange this may seem, there
is no manner of reason to doubt the truth of it. What has
been alleged from Joseph us and Tacitus assures us, that
though often disappointed, they were not disheartened.
Though Jesus had been crucified, a surprising power ap
peared in his disciples, and wonderful works were wrought
by them in the name of Jesus, which were infallible proofs
of his resurrection and ascension. Hereupon undoubtedly
the hopes of the salvation they wished for revived in these
men.

7. The Jews' expectation of a temporal deliverance for
their nation, nourished and strengthened by sensual passions,
together with their prodigious wickedness, which they in
their fond imaginations had reconciled with the peculiar
friendship and favour of God, does fully account for this
people's so generally rejecting and despising Jesus, though
there was the fullest proof given that he was he who was
to come. John v. 43. " I am come," says our Lord, " in
my Father's name, and ye receive me not ; if another shall
come in his own name, him ye will receive." They were
ready to join any one who made them promises of a tempo
ral salvation ; but they would not receive, or at least not
hold to any one that did not. If they would have received
any one without this condition, they would have received
Jesus.

CHAP. VI.

OF THE GREAT CORRUPTION OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE.

THE evangelists have represented the Jewish nation as very
corrupt and wicked about the time our Saviour conversed
and taught in this world. When Johjo the Baptist " saw
VOL. i.

146 Credibility of the Gospel History.

many of the pharisees and sadducees come to his baptism,
he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned
you to flee from the wrath to come ?" Matt. iii. 7. Our
Lord himself calls them " an evil and adulterous genera
tion," ch. xii. 39. When they boasted of their relation to
Abraham, and yet sought to kill him, who had told them
the truth, our Saviour tells them : " Ye are of your father
the devil, and the works of your father ye will do," John
viii. 40 — 44. Our Lord often intimates, that the true rea
son why his doctrine was so little regarded by them, was
this, that their affections were entirely engaged by worldly
advantages, and they had no sincere love of truth or virtue.
" This is the condemnation, that light is come into the
world ; and men loved darkness rather than light, because
their deeds were evil," John iii. 19. " How can ye believe,
which receive honour one of another, and seek not that ho
nour which cometh from God only ? " ch. v. 44. And
from many other parts of the Gospels it is evident, their
righteousness consisted in a regard to some ritual parts of
Moses's law, and in observing the traditional rules of the
elders ; " making broad their phylacteries, and enlarging
the border of their garments ; in paying tythes of mint and
anise and cummin ; while they omitted the weightier mat
ters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith," Matt, xxiii.
5—23.

That the corruption of the Jews is not at all aggravated
here, is evident from the character given of these times, or
of those very near them, by Josephus himself, who was
zealous for the honour of his country. * Eleazar,' says he,
4 the chief man among the Sicarii,a was a descendant of
' Judas, who had persuaded not a few of the Jews not to
4 enrol themselves, when Cyrenius the censor was sent into

* Judea. For then the Sicarii conspired against all that
' were willing to submit to the Romans. They treated all

* such as public enemies : Affirming they were no better

4 than strangers, since they surrendered to the Romans those
4 privileges of their nation, which ought to be precious to
4 all Jews. — But all this was mere pretence, and given out
4 with no other view than to cover their cruelty and avarice.
4 That was indeed a time fruitful of all sorts of wickedness
4 among the Jews, so that no evil whatever was left un-
4 practised. It is impossible for man to contrive any new
4 wickedness, which was not then committed. All were
4 corrupt in their private and public character. They
4 strove to exceed each other in impiety toward God, and

a Villains that went with short swords concealed under their clothes.

T/ie Corruption of the Jewish People. 147

* injustice toward their neighbour. The great men oppressed
' the people, and the people strove to ruin them. The

* former were ambitious of dominion and power, the latter
' had an insatiable thirst of violence and plunder.' b

It appears from hence, that the corruption of this people
was general. If Josephus had not made this acknowledg
ment, it might have been proved by an enumeration of the
many acts of injustice and villany he has related, that all
sorts of people were abandoned to wickedness. I think
this is not needful ; I shall, however, add two or three more
passages.

In his account of their affairs, whilst Felix was procura

tor of Judea, he has these words : * Such was the impu

dence of the high priests, that they would send their

servants to the storehouses, to seize and bring away the

tythes that belonged to the priests ; by which means some

of the priests, whose circumstances were but strait, perish

ed for want : so far did the violence of factious men pre

vail over justice and equity.'0 Did not our Saviour say

very truly, " It is written, My house shall be called the

house of prayer, but ye have made it a den of thieves 1 "

Matt. xxi. 13.

Not far off from this passage there is another, which may

give us an idea of their hypocrisy, (a crime they are often

charged with in the gospels,) and of their artful and impu

dent pretensions to religion, when they intended the great

est villanies. Felix by a large sum of money persuaded

Dora, a native of Jerusalem, and an intimate friend of the

high priest Jonathan, to undertake that the said high priest

should be murdered. Dora accordingly hired some of thed

robbers (so Josephus calls a set of men the country was

then filled with) for this purpose. * Some of these men

coming up into the city, as if with a design to worship

God, and having short swords under their coats, mixing

themselves with the multitude, kill Jonathan. This mur

der passing unpunished, after this the robbers came in at

the feasts without any manner of concern ; and carrying,

~Etyf.Vf.TO yap TTWQ b %povo(; ZKUVOQ TravTodaTTTjg tv TOIQ la&ztoif
7ro\u0opO£, u)Q fjtrjdev jcttKtcrf epyov airpaKTOv KaTaXnrtiv, /iqo" « rt£
c?ia7r\arrav tdeXijatifv, £%ai/ av TI Kaivortpov fKevptiv' ovrug idia Tf. KCLI KOivrj
TravTiQ tvoarjaav, KO.I Trpog v7rep/3a\Eiv a\\rj\sg tv re TO.IQ irpog rov Qtov
ttff£/3«ai£, KCII Taiq tig TOV irXtjffiov aSiKiaiQ, ttytXavtisriaav' 01 fiev Swaroi ra

7T\r)9)J KCtK&VTE£, 01 TToXXoi St TSQ SwaTSQ a7ToX\Wai ffTTfvdoVTfQ' 1]V yap fKll-

VOLQ ptv e-mOvfjiia TB rvpavvtiv, rote £e TS /3ia&<r6ai icai ra. e viropwv SiapTraZeiv.
De B. J. lib. vii. cap. 8. sect. 1. c Antiq. lib. xx. cap. 7. sect. 5.

Kg.Ktivo£ vTraKsaaq ffiij^avrjfraTO dia TIOV \r]<zd)v Trpa^Orjvai rotary

TOV <povov. Ibid. sect. 5.

148 Credibility of the Gospel History.

* as before, swords under their clothes, and mixing" with the

* multitudes, they killed divers people ; some whom they
' reckoned their enemies, some whom they were hired by
' others to destroy. This they did, not only in other parts
4 of the city, but within the bounds of the temple itself.*
' For even there would they kill men, and yet not seem to

* commit any crime. For this reason, it seems to me, that
God, detesting their impiety, forsook our city ; and not

< esteeming' the temple any longer a pure habitation for him,

* brought the Romans against us, threw on the city a fire to
' purify it, and delivered up us with our wives and children
' to servitude, that by these calamities we might learn
6 wisdom.'

There is another noted passage of the same historian,
which may not be omitted. * I cannot say it without regret,
et I must declare it is my opinion, that if the Romans
ad delayed to come against these wretches, the city [Je-
rusalem] would have been swallowed up by an earthquake,
or overwhelmed by a deluge, or else been consumed by
fire from heaven, as Sodom was : for it bore a generation
of men more wicked than those which had suffered such
calamities.' f I conclude with the following short passage.
To reckon up all their villanies,' says he, ' is impossible ;
but in a word, never did any city suffer so great calami
ties ; nor was there ever from the beginning of the world,
a time more fruitful of wickedness than that

'•I

e Ov \LOvov Kara TIJV aXXqv TTO\IV, aXXa KO.I Kara TO tcpov evisg' Kai yap
£K€i fftyarrtiv eroX^wv, tide tv T^ST^) doKavre^ aatfitw. Ibid.

f OVK av i>7ro=r«Xai/i£v, snreiv, a /*oi iceXevei TO TraOoQ ot/zat, Pw/iaiwv
(SpaOvvovTUV 67Ti TSQ a\iTT)Qi8£, t) KaTttTToQ^vai av V7TO ^aTfiarog, i\ KaTcucXveOr)-
vai TTJV TroXiv, ij TBC, TijQ 2o$o/j»;g ju£raXa/3fii^ KeoavvsQ' TTO\V yap raiv TO.VTO.
iraQovTwv rjveyice ytvtav aQeuTtpav. De B. J. lib. v. cap. 13. sect. 6.

g Ka0' fjcarov psv sv £7rt£ievai rrjv Trapavofjiiav avTotv, advvctTov' avvt-
\ovra 5' eiireiv, firjTS TToXiv a\\r)v TOiavra TTSTTovOrjvai, pyre yeveav t% atwvog
yeyovivai Kaiciag yovifjLwrepav. Ibid. cap. 10. sect. 5.

The Circumstances of our Saviour's last Sufferings. 149

CHAP. VII.

THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF OUR SAVIOUR'S LAST SUFFERINGS.

I. Caiaphas high priest at that time. II. Pontius Pilate
governor of Judea. III. Pilate }s wife in Judea. IV.
Herod the tetrarch at Jerusalem. V. Of the high priest's
rending his clothes. VI. High priests spoken of in the
plural number. VII. Pilate now at Jerusalem. VIII.
Pilate condemns Jesus to content the Jews. IX. Remarks
concerning Pilate's power in Judea. X. Of the title
written upon the cross. XI. In Hebrew, Greek, and
Latin. XII. Of the scoffs and derisions which our Sa
viour met with. XIII. Jesus scourged before he was
crucified. XIV. Bore his cross. XV. Of his being cru
cified without the city. XVI. Of his burial. XVII,
And embalming.

IN the history of our Saviour's last suffering's at Jerusalem,
there is mention made of four persons of distinction : Caia
phas the high priest, Pontius Pilate the governor, his wife,
and Herod the tetrarch of Galilee.

I. St. Matthew says, ch. xxvi. 3, " Then assembled toge
ther the chief priests and the scribes, and the elders of the
people, unto the palace of the high priest, who was called
Caiaphas." And afterwards, ver. 57, " Then they that had
laid hold on Jesus, led him away to Caiaphas the high
priest." St. John likewise assures us, that at this time Caia
phas was the high priest, and has informed us of a particu
lar omitted by St. Matthew, namely, that our Saviour was
carried to Annas, ch. xviii. 13, " And led him away to
Annas first, (for he was father-in-law to Caiaphas which
was the high priest that same year)." And again, " Now
Annas had sent him bound unto Caiaphas the high priest"
ver. 24-28.

That Caiaphas was now high priest appears hence : he
was made high priest by Valerius Gratus, predecessor of
Pontius Pilate, and was put out of that office by Vitellius
president of Syria, after Pilate was sent away out of the
province of Judea. Josephus informs us of Caiaphas's ad
vancement to the priesthood in these words : ' And a year

* after he [Gratus] removed him, [Eleazar the son of

* Ananus,] and gave the high priesthood to Simon the son

* of Camithus. He, having enjoyed this honour not above a,

150 Credibility of the Gospel History .

' year, was succeeded by Joseph, who is also called Caiaphas
' After this Gratus went away for Rome, having1 been
' eleven years in Judea, and Pontius Pilate came thither as
' his successor/ a The same historian gives us the account
of Caiaphas's removal in this manner. Vitellius whilst in
Syria sent orders to Pilate to repair to Rome ; after which
Vitellius went up to Jerusalem, and gave directions con
cerning several matters. ' Having done these things,' says
Josephus, ' he took away the priesthood from the high
' priest Joseph, who is called Caiaphas, and appointed Jo-
* nathan the son of Ananus high priest, and then returned
' to Antioch.'b

It is evident therefore that Caiaphas was high priest all
the time that Pilate was in Judea.

II. We shall presently have occasion to take notice of
several things concerning Pilate : I shall only here show
that Pilate was at this time governor of Judea. St. Luke
says, ch. iii. 1, 2, " Now in the fifteenth year of the reign
of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judea ,
the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the
wilderness." If St. Luke in this text intends not the
fifteenth year of Tiberius's reign from the death of Augustus,
but the fifteenth year of his proconsular power when he was
made colleague of Augustus, it may possibly admit a de
bate, whether Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea when
John the Baptist began to preach : therefore I have re
served the consideration of that particular for the next
book. But there can be no question made but that Pilate
was governor of Judea at the time of our Saviour's cruci
fixion ; whether St. Luke be understood in that place to
speak of the proconsular power of Tiberius, or his sole em
pire after the death of Augustus.

The fifteenth year of Tiberius's proconsular empire, and
the twelfth of his sole empire, are pretty near coincident.
For the 15th of his proconsular empire is supposed to be
gin0 about the 27th of August, A. D. 25. And the 12th of
his sole empire, began the 19th of August in the same
year.

a EvtavTS de diayevofJievB, /cat rovSt Travcrag, St/iwvi ry Ka/u08 TTJV «px«pw-
ffvvi]v TrapacWajo-iv' 8 TrXtov KM ry£e tviavrs TI\V rifitjv f%ovTi dieyivtro
%porof, Kai Iai<T?;7ro£» 6 Kai Kata^af, $ia$o%o? i\v avrif)' Kai Tparog JJLEV TOLVTCL
7Tpa£rtf ft£ Pwf.ir]v eTrava^Mpti, evStica trrj $iarpi«//a£ tv Isfiaig,' HOVTIOQ fit
IliAaro£ SiadoxoQ avr^j r/Kfr. Antiq. lib. xviii. cap. 2. sect. 2.

b Kat ravra TrpaZag tTTi cvfpyfcrt^ ra tQv&Q, Kai TOV ap%t£pca Iwai]7rov, TOV
Kai Kata^aj/ eTriKaX&fjievov, a7r«AAc:£a£ TJJQ itp<o<rvvr]Q, IwvaOqv KaOi^rjcnv,
Avavs rs «p^ifp£w^ viov' f?r' AvTio\eiaq & avOig eTroitiro rr]v odov. Ibid,
cap. 5. sect. 3. c Vid. Pagi. Crit. in Baron. A. D. 25.

The Circumstances of our Saviour's last Sufferings. 151

There is undoubtedly some difficulty in computing- ex
actly the time which the evangelists have allotted to John
the Baptist's and our Saviour's ministry. But whether we
understand St. Luke to speak of the " fifteenth year of Ti
berius V proconsular power, or of his sole empire, I think that
the earliest date of our Saviour's crucifixion must be that
of the Jewish passover, which happened in the 15th year
of Tiberius's sole empire, A. D. 29, and the latest date the
Jewish passover, which happened in the 19th year of Tibe
rius's sole empire, A. D. 33.

Take any year from 29 to 33 inclusively, and Pontius
Pilate was governor of Judea.

This may be made appear in this matter. Tiberius died
the 16th of March, A. D. 37. d Vitellius received the
tidings of it at Jerusalem.6 But Pilate had been removed
some time before this,f as is allowed by all : how long- be
fore we will not now inquire. Pilate therefore was removed
from his government before the passover, A. D. 37, when
he had been there ten years. So Josephus says expressly :
' And Pilate having* been ten years in Judea hastened away
* to Rome, in obedience to the orders he had received from
' Vitellius, not daring to refuse.' £ Subtract 10 from 37,
and it appears that Pilate was governor of Judea before the
passover in A. D. 27, and consequently before our Saviour's
last sufferings.

That our Saviour was crucified in Judea in the reign of
Tiberius under Pontius Pilate, is the unanimous testimony
of Christian writers, is particularly mentioned11 by Tacitus,
an heathen author, and is not denied by any. But this be
ing a principal fact, I am not obliged to produce any pas
sages relating to it now. All I am concerned to do at
present is, to show that according to the notes of time men
tioned by the evangelists, Pontius Pilate must have been
governor of Judea when our Saviour was crucified. This
I presume I have made appear from Josephus, who must
be allowed to have known what government his own coun
try was under at that time.

III. St. Matthew says, chap, xxvii. 19, that " when he
[Pilate] was set down on the judgment-seat, his wife sent
unto him, saying, Have thou nothing to do with that just

d Ibid. A. 37. n. ii. e Joseph. Ant. lib. xviii. cap. vi. p. 806. in.

f Ibid. cap. v. sect. 2. s Kat IliXaroe, fojca tremv SutTpuj/at ITTI

IsSaiaq, tig PWJUJJV jjTmycro, TO.IQ OvtrfXAis TrtiOo/jievoG evroXaig, SK ov avrti-
•irtiv. Joseph, ibid. h Auctor nominis ejus Christus, qui, Tiberio

imperitante, per Procuration Pont him Pilatum, supplicio affectus erat,
Ann. lib. xv. cap. 44.

152 Credibility of the Gospel History.

man : for I have suffered many things this day in a dream
because of him."

So long as the commonwealth subsisted, it was very un
usual for the governors of the provinces to take their wives
with them; and afterwards Augustus seems not much to
have approved of it/ But, however, the contrary custom
prevailed. It is evident from Tacitus, that at the time of
Augustus's death, Germanicus had his wife Agrippina with
hirn in Germany.k And in the beginning of Tiberius's
reign he carried her with him into the east.1 And Piso
the prefect of Syria took his wife also along with him at
the same time.m But there is nothing can render this more
apparent, than a motion made in the Roman senate by
Severus Caesina, in the fourth consulship of Tiberius and
second of Drusus Caesar, A. D. 21, < That no magistrate, to
' whom any province was assigned, should be accompanied
' by his wife ;'n except the senate's rejecting it, and that with
some indignation.0

IV. St. Luke says, ch. xxiii. 7, that " when Pilate heard of
Galilee, he asked whether the man were a Galilean. And as
soon as he knew that he belonged to Herod's jurisdiction, he
sent him to Herod, who himself was also at Jerusalem at that
time." As this Herod was the son of Herod the Great, and
a Jew, there is all the reason in the world to suppose, that
he often went to Jerusalem at the Jewish feasts. Josephus
has particularly mentioned his being there at one of their
feasts, A. D. 37, which I believe none will deny to be the
feast of the passover. He is speaking of Vitellius president
of Syria. ' Having given directions about these matters, he
' [Vitellius] went up to Jerusalem with Herod the tetrarch
6 and his friends to worship God, a feast of the Jews being
' nigh at hand.' P

Having despatched these general things, we may now
take the remaining particulars in the order in which
they lie.

V. Whilst our Saviour was under examination before the
high priest and rulers of the Jews, after they had in vain

5 Disciplinam severissime rexit, ne legatorum quidem cuiquam nisi gravate,
hibernisque demum mensibus, permisit uxorem mtervisere. Sueton. in Aug.
cap. 24. k Tacit. Ann. lib. i. cap. 40, 41. l Id. lib. ii. cap.

54. m Ibid. cap. 55. n Inter quas Severus Caecina censuit,

ne quern magistratum, cui provincia obvenisset, uxor comitaretur. Id. An.
lib. iii. cap. 33. ° Paucorum haec adsensu audita, plurefe obturbabant

neque relatum de negotio, neque Csecinam dignum tantae rei censorem. Ibid.

Cap. 34. P A.VTO£ TE lltTCL Hpa>#8 TS TlTpa.^** Kttt TWV 0t\WJ> £l£

IspoacXvfJia avyet, 3rv<r<DV T^ 0f/to, topTrjQ TraTpia ladaioiQ tv£?r]Kvia£. Joseph.
Ant. lib. xviii. cap. 6. sect. 3.

The Circumstances of our Saviour's last Sufferings. 153

attempted to get evidence against him from witnesses, it is
related, Matt. xxvi. 63 — 65, that the high priest " said unto
him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us
whether thou be the Christ the Son of God. Jesus saith
unto him, Thou hast said : nevertheless I say unto you,
hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right
hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. Then
the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken
blasphemy."

It has been thought by some that the high priest might
not rend his clothes : but that he might, and did do so,
upon extraordinary occasions, will appear from the follow
ing particulars. The author of the first book of Maccabees
says, ch. xi. 71, " Then Jonathan rent his clothes, and cast
earth upon his head." Jonathan was then high priest ; the
occasion of this action was his men's running away from
their enemies. Lightfoot in his Hebrew and Talmudical
Exercitations upon this text of St. Matthew, quotes these
words from Maimonides : ' When witnesses speak out the
' blasphemy which they heard, then all hearing the blas-
' phemy are bound to rend their clothes/ As the high
priest among the Jews was one of their judges, and was
present at their trials, he must be comprehended in this
rule. I subjoin to these a passage of Josephus. Perhaps
it will not be thought to come up to our point, because he
does not speak of the high priest in the singular number.
But I do not see why the person who was actually in
the high priesthood must be excluded ; and in one respect
it exceeds the fact now before us. For Caiaphas undoubt
edly had on at this time his ordinary clothes ; whereas
Josephus speaks of the priests rending the garments which
they wore in their ministrations at the temple.

The case was this : Florus governor of Judea had plun
dered the sacred treasury at Jerusalem^ and committed
many other abuses. Hereupon the Jews being highly pro
voked, were ready to break out into war with the Romans.
And a great number of them being got together into an open
place in the city, gave out many reflections upon Florus.
Josephus says, that upon this, < The chief men and the
4 high priests, being filled with concern, rent their c/arments,
6 and falling down upon their kneesr beseeched the people
' to be peaceable, and to bear patiently what had passed
4 already, rather than provoke Florus to do still worse/

When this tumult was appeased, Florus intending (as

q De Bell. J. lib. ii. cap. 14. sect. 6. r Oi SVVUTOI aw

rac, taOrirag TrepupprjZavTO. Ibid. cap. 15. sect. 2.

154 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Josephus supposes) to exact conditions the people would
not comply with, and thereby to bring' on an open war,
called the chief men to him, and told them, that ' he would
' esteem this a testimony of their fidelity and of their inten-
' tion to be quiet for the future, if the people would go out
' of the city and salute his soldiers which were then coming
' from Caesarea.' The chief men of the Jews then called
the people . to the temple and desired them to submit to
these demands, but were not able to prevail upon them.

* Then every priest and minister of God, when they had
' brought forth the holy vessels, being clothed in the vest-
' ments which they wear in their sacred functions, entreated
' them not to exasperate the Romans to come and take away
' from them those thing's which were consecrated to God. Then
6 might be seen the high priests themselves with ashes on their

* heads, and their breasts naked, their garments being rent.'5

VI. In this history we have frequent mention of chief
priests, in the plural number. Matt. xxvi. 59, " Now the
chief priests and elders and all the council sought false
witness against him." Mark xiv. 53, " And they led Jesus
away to the high priest : and with him were assembled the
chief priests and the elders and the scribes." I know not,
but this may be thought by some an impropriety in the evan
gelists' expression, because strictly there was but one high
priest among the Jews at a time. This is certainly very true,
and the evangelists appear to have known it very well. But
then all those who had ever bore the office of high priest were
called so likewise, and I believe some others besides ; I need
not now enquire who. But so far is this style from affording"
any just objection against the sacred historians, that it may
very well be reckoned one proof of their being well acquaint
ed with the things of which they have written, since it is the
usual style of Josephus. I need not produce any particular
passages for the proof of it. The expression occurs more
than once in those I have just now transcribed.

VII. We are informed, that from the high priests our
Saviour " was led away, and delivered to Pontius Pilate."
All the evangelists assure us of this, Matt, xxvii. 2 ; Mark
xv. 1 ; Luke xxiii. 1 ; John xviii. 28, 29. It is plain from
the New Testament, and other ancient writings, that the

s ~EvOa dr) irag fisv ifpevg, Trag ft v7rfpr)Tt](; ra Qt&, ra ayia GKEVT) Trpo-
Kcti Tov KOfffiov tv u> XtiT&pyf-iv tQoQ t]V avTQiQ, avaXafSovTeg, — Kar-
>pv\a%ai TOV upov Koa^iov avroig, icai ^r] irpog apTrayrjV TMV 3-awi/
wjwat8£ eptOurat' TSQ 3e apx*fp«e avrsg rjv iSetv, KaTafiMjjitvag fJ-tv

Ti]Q KffyarjG KQviV) yv^ivBg Se ra Tfpva, TOJV tcr9r)T(*)v TrtpiepprjyiJLfVMV. Ibid.

sect. 3, 4.

The Circumstances of our Saviour's last Sufferings. 155

Roman governor of Judea usually resided at Caesarea,*
there being only an inferior officer left at Jerusalem, with a
band or legion of soldiers, to keep all things there in order :
but yet it is certain, that at the time of their great feasts,
and especially at the passover, the governor himself was
wont to be at Jerusalem, to prevent or suppress disturb
ances. There is frequent mention in Josephus's history of
the presence of the procurators of Judea, or of the
presidents of Syria, at Jerusalem at these times. I have
just now shown that Vitellius, president of Syria, was at
Jerusalem, at the passover, A. D. 37. He had been there
also at the passover of the year before, as is very plain in
Josephus.u In the reign of Claudius, Cumanus, procurator
of Judea, wras at Jerusalem at one of the passovers.v And
afterwards, in the reign of the same emperor, Quadratus,
president of Syria, having sent away Cumanus, just now
mentioned, to give an account of his administration to
CaBsar, went up himself to Jerusalem. Joseph us's words
are these : * Having finished these affairs, he went up from
* Lydda to Jerusalem : and finding the people celebrating
' the feast of unleavened bread very quietly, he returned to
4 Antioch,w the seat of the presidents of Syria.' In another
place he speaks of a great number of Jews, who presented
complaints at the passover to Cestius Gallius, president of
Syria, against Florus their own governor, then likewise at
Jerusalem.31

Moreover, very probably Pilate was often at Jerusalem,
at the feasts, for the administration of justice. Jerusalem
was the chief city of Judea, and had a council in it. And
it was very usual for the Roman governors to go, at times,
to the chief towns of their provinces, on this account, as is
evident from many passages of the Roman authors.? And

1 Haud dubia destinatione discessere, Mucianiis Antiochiam, Vespasianus
Csesaream: ilia Syriae, hsec Judaese, caput est. Tacit. Hist. lib. ii. cap. 79. vid.
et Joseph, de B. J. lib. ii. cap. 9. sect. 2. Antiq. lib. xviii. cap. 4. sect. 1. lib.
xx. cap. 4. sect. 4. u Ant. lib. xviii. cap. 5. sect. 3. T Ibid. lib. xx. cap.
4. sect. 3. de B. J. lib. ii. cap. 12. sect. 1. w Tavra &.a7rpa£a/uvoe, OTTO

Avddwv avaflaivtv tiQ IfpocroXv/ia* /eat KaraXa/3a»v TO ir\r]QoQ ayov TTJV TOJV aZ,v-
H<jjv toprjjv a00{)U|3a>£, tig A.vTio^tiav tiravtiti. de Bell. lib. ii. cap. 12. sect. 6.

x Ibid. cap. 14. sect; 3. y Paucos dies ipse [Ccesar] in provincia moratus,
quum celeriter omnes conventus percurrisset, publicas controversias cognovisset,
&c. A. Hirt. de Bell. Gall. — Laodiceam pridie kal. Sext. venimus : ibi morati
biduum perillustres fuimus, honorificisque verbis omnes injurias revellimus
superiores. Quod idem dein Apameae quinque dies morati, etSynnadistri-
duum, Philomeli quinque dies, Iconii decem fecimus. Nihil ea jurisdictione
aequabilius, nihil lenius, nihil gravius. Cic. ad Att. lib. v. ep. 20. vid. et lib.
vi. ep. 2. Quo loco mihi non praetermittenda videtur praeclari imperatoris
egregia ac singularis diligentia. Nam scitote esse oppidum in Sicilia nullura

156 Credibility of the Gospel History.

it may be fairly concluded from the evangelists, that Pilate
was at Jerusalem now for this very end : as it is also very
plain, that he had used to keep court there at this feast.
" Ye have a custom," says he, " that I should release unto
you one at the passover," John xviii. 39.

VIII. In the account the evangelists have given us of
Pilate's conduct, there are several things very remarkable ;
which ought therefore to be considered and accounted
for. The high priests and elders of the Jews were very
earnest for our Saviour's condemnation ; but Pilate appears
very backward to pronounce any sentence upon him. " He
knew that for envy they had delivered him," Matt, xxvii.
18. When they charged him with stirring up the people,
and saying that he was a king, " Pilate said unto him, Art
thou the king of the Jews? Jesus answered, My kingdom
is not of this world. Pilate therefore said unto him, Art
thou a king then ? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a
king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I
into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth. —
Pilate saith unto him, What is truth ? And when he had
said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto
them, I find in him no fault at all," Luke xxiii. 2, 3. John
xviii. 33, 36-38.

There being no proof of any disturbances caused by our
Saviour among- the people, Pilate inquires into this charge,
of his taking upon him the title of a king : and perceiving
that he intended not by it any worldly government, but
only that his design had been to teach men some certain
principles, he asks him " What is truth ?" or what was that
truth which he professed to teach ? But not being solicitous
to know particularly what these principles were, and being
satisfied from what he had already heard from our Saviour,
that there was nothing seditious in them, he did not stay
for an answer to this question, but immediately goes out to
the Jews, and tells them, " I find in him no fault at all."

Grotius supposes that Pilate, by the kingdom our Saviour
spoke of, understood such a kingdom as the Stoics ascribed
to their wise men, a kingdom no more prejudicial to the
Roman government than theirs.2 He certainly conceived
of our Saviour as a leader only of some innocent sect, and
apprehended, that it was nothing but envy and secret ma
lice, that moved the pharisees to demand judgment against
him.

ex iis oppidis, in quibiis consistere praetores, et conventum agere solent, quo
in oppido non isti, ex aliqua familia non ignobili, delecta ad libidinem mulier
esset. In Ver. lib. v. cap. 11. z Grot, in Job. xviii. 38.

The Circumstances of our Saviour's last Sufferings. 157

But notwithstanding what Pilate said of the innocence of
Jesus, the Jews were still pressing' for a sentence against
him. However Pilate could not yet be prevailed on to an
swer their demands, but ordered him to be scourged ; and
the soldiers platted " a crown of thorns, and put it upon
his head, and they put on him a purple robe," abused and
mocked him. Pilate hopinga they might be satisfied with
this, " went forth again ; and saith unto them, Behold, I
bring him forth to you, that ye may know that I find no
fault in him. When the chief priests therefore, and the
officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify him, cru
cify him. Pilate saith unto them, Take ye him and crucify
him ; for I find no fault in him. The Jews answered him,
We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because
he made himself the Son of God. When Pilate therefore
heard that saying he was the more afraid" John xix.
1-8.

Many learned and judicious expositors understand by
these last words, that Pilate became yet more afraid than
before to pass sentence of condemnation upon Jesus ; lest,
after all, he should prove to be some extraordinary person.
They think, that having, probably, received some accounts
of our Saviour's miracles, and hearing this charge that he
" had made himself the son of God," he was brought into
some doubts whether he might not be some uncommon per
son, like those heroes or demi-gods, which were so much
spoken of among the Greeks and Romans, and therefore he
was seized with a fresh fear of being concerned in his
death. b

The words will bear another sense, and ever since I have
read Josephus, in whom there are divers instances of the
Jewish zeal about this time, and of tumults and seditions
which they run into, upon the least affront offered to their
religious institutions, some of which tumults Pilate had been
witness to, I have understood these words in a different sense ;
and have thought that Pilate finding they interested their
religion in this cause, and that they were resolute in it, be
came afraid he must at last submit to them. And I am
glad to find, that I am not singular in this interpretation.

a So Augustine understood this place. Tune cum flagellasset Jesum, et a militi-
bus veste illusoria, multisque illusionibus male tractari permisisset ; (credo ut hoc
modo saltern eorum furorem mitigaret, ne usque ad mortem saevire pertend-
erent ;) exiit iterum Pilatus foras, et dicit eis : Ecce adduco eum vobis, &c.
Aug. De Cons. Evang. 1. iii. c. 13. n. 46. Ed. Bened.

b Metuens, ob res miras deo auditas, ne forte verum esset orturn eum divino
satu, sicut Romani et Grgeci de heroibus suis credebant. Grot, in loc. vid. et
Hammond, &c.

158 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Beza says upon this place, ' he was not without reason afraid,
* that an open sedition might happen, if he did not comply
' with the multitude.'0

But this sense being liable to an objection, from an ex
pression St. John uses after this, it will be needful to con
sider what follows. John xix. 9 — 12. Pilate having heard
this, " went again into the judgment-hall, and saith unto
Jesus, Whence art thou? but Jesus gave him no answer.
Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me ?
Knowest thou not, that I have power to crucify thee, and
have power to release thee? Jesus answered, Thou couldest
have no power at all against me, except it were given thee
from above : therefore he that delivered me unto thee, hath
the greater sin. And from thenceforth Pilate sought to re
lease him."

These last words may be reckoned an objection to the sense
in which I understand the words above mentioned. But cer
tainly St. John does not hereby intend, that Pilate then be
gan to seek to release Jesus. He has, before this, related
divers attempts which Pilate had made to bring the Jews
to temper. What he means hereby is, that he still sought
to release him ; that upon hearing what Jesus said in this
last examination, he made another trial of the Jews, to see
if they could not be contented. Our Lord had maintained
his innocence, told Pilate that he could have no power
against him, if it had not been allowed by the providence
of God for particular ends and reasons ; and that they who
had delivered him to him, had been guilty of an heinous
and aggravated crime. Pilate, therefore, being still satisfied
of his innocence, made one and another attempt after this,
to bring the Jews to consent to his being released. But at
length, " the voices of them and of the chief priests pre
vailed. When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but
rather a tumult was made, then delivered he him unto them
to be crucified," Luke xxiii. 23; Matt. xvii. 24; John xix. 16.

So that, whether the fear which seized Pilate, upon the
Jews telling him that Jesus had " made himself the son of
God," was a fear arising from an apprehension, that he
might be some extraordinary person, and more than a man ;

c Mag-is metuit.'] Ergo jam antea perculsus erat, alternante nimirum con-
scientia, et clamoribus Judaeorum, nunc etiam legem praetexentium : non
temere veritus, ne tandem seditio aperta erumperet, nisi multitudinis voluntati
obtemperaret. Bez. Nov. Test, in loc. Calvin also allows that the words are
capable of this sense. Duplex potest elici sensus : prior est, quod veritus
fuerit Pilatus ne sustineret aliquam culpam si exortus esset tumultus, quia
Christum non damn-asset ; alter, quod, andito Filii Dei nomine, mens ejus
religione tacta fuerit. Which last Calvin approves, in loc.

The Circumstances of our Saviour's last Sufferings. 159

or whether it was an apprehension of disturbances and tu
mults, if he did not hearken to the Jews ; yet it is evident
from the passages last quoted, and from many others in the
gospels, that the evangelists have represented Pilate's con
demnation of our Lord, as extorted from him.

He told them once and again, that he " found no fault in
him :" he had him scourged, and brought him out to them
in a mock royal dress, hoping they might be satisfied with
this punishment and disgrace. It being his custom at the
passover to release to them some prisoner of their nation,
and the people being gathered together in great num
bers, and now demanding this favour of him, he proposed
to them that Jesus might be the person. But they being*
moved by the high priests, " desired that Barabbas might be
released ;" a criminal so infamous, that no one not void of
all shame, would have spoken for him ; a man that had
been taken up in an insurrection against the Roman go
vernment, and that had committed robbery and murder.
Not being able, by all these methods, to move the com
passion or equity of the Jews ; nor observing that there
was any party among the common people, that favoured
Jesus ; and being willing " to content the people, he de
livered Jesus unto them to be crucified," Mark xv. 15.
The evangelists are unanimous in the account, that this
sentence was pronounced only " to content the Jews ;" that
is, either to secure the peace of the province, or to main
tain his interest with the people, when he saw that nothing*
could satisfy or appease their rage but the death of Jesus.
" When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but
rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his
hands before the multitude, saying-, I am innocent from the
blood of this just person; see ye to it. Then answered all
the people and said, His blood be on us, and on our chil
dren," Matt, xxvii. 24, 25; Luke xxiii. 24, 25; John xix.
14-16.

It will seem strange to some, that a Roman governor
should have any inducements to comply with the demands
of people, contrary to his own judgment and inclination.
But he that considers the account we have of the principles
and behaviour of the Jewish nation at this time will be sa
tisfied the evangelists have here given a just and true re
presentation of this transaction ; and will be convinced, that
a Roman governor, with all his authority, could not pass
by any thing which they apprehended to be a breach on
their religious constitution without hazarding the peace of

160 Credibility of the Gospel History.

his province. All this will not justify an unrighteous sen
tence, but that this was the case is plain.

We have seen that the high priests pretended, that Jesus
had been guilty of blasphemy, in making " himself the
Son of God," and that " by their law he ought to die,"
John xix. 7c And Pilate had had experience of their pro
digious firmness and zeal for all the parts of their religion.
There are two particular proofs they gave him of this, re
lated by Josephus ; the one on occasion of his placing the
Roman ensigns in Jerusalem ; the other upon his attempt
ing to bring water into the city with money taken out of
the sacred treasury. The former is related by Josephus
thus : ' Pilate, the prefect of Judea, sending his army from
Csesarea, and putting them into winter quarters at Jeru
salem, brought the carved images of Csesar, which are on
the ensigns, into the city, in violation of the Jewish laws,
since our law forbids the making of any images. For
which reason the former governors were wont to come into
the city with ensigns destitute of those ornaments. Pilate
was the first who set up images in Jerusalem ; and he did
it privately, the army making their entry in the night
time. But as soon as the people knew it, they went in a
vast body to Caesarea, making earnest supplication for
many days that the images might be removed. He not
granting their petition, thinking it would be dishonourable
to the emperor to do so, and they still persisting in their
request to him ; on the sixth day, having privately order
ed his soldiers to their arms, he seated himself on his
tribunal in the Circus, near which he had placed his men,
that they might be in readiness. And when the Jews
came to him thither with their petition, his soldiers having,
upon a signal given, surrounded them, he threatened them
with immediate death, if they did not give over their
' clamours, and return home.. They then threw themselves
6 on the ground, and offered their necks to the sword, and
6 said, " they could die much more easily, than they could
' dare to do any thing contrary to the wisdom of their laws."
' Pilate, surprised at their firmness in the observation of
' their laws, immediately gave orders for bringing back the
' imagoes from Jerusalem to Coesarea.'c

There immediately follows after this an account of the

disturbance raised at Pilate's attempting to bring water into

the city, at the expense of money taken out of the sacred

treasury. Josephus says, * That many thousands got together,

c Antiq. lib. xviii. cap. 4. sect. 1.

The Circumstances of our Saviour's last Sufferings. 161

* crying out, that he ought to desist from this undertaking ;

* that many vented most reproachful speeches against him.

* — Some were killed and others wounded in this tumult,

* but at length the sedition was suppressed.'

Both these attempts of Pilate were made at the beginning
of his government. Some learned men, who suppose that
Pilate came into Judea, A. D. 25, place them in that year.6
And others who suppose that Pilate was not procurator of
Judea till the year 27, place them there. f I am of opinion,
the first attempt was made by him at the beginning of the
first winter after his arrival in the province, and the other
the summer following. Undoubtedly, he had seen the
Jews' firmness upon both these occasions, and possibly
upon some others, before the time of the event which we are
considering.

We have another attempt of Pilate's, of the same nature,
mentioned in the letter which Agrippa the elder sent to
Caligula, as this letter is given us by Philo. In some parti
culars it has a great resemblance with the story Joseph us
has told, of Pilate's bringing the ensigns into Jerusalem,
and in others it is very different from it : which has given
occasion to some learned men to suppose, that Philo has
been mistaken, s For my own part, as I make no doubt,
but Josephus's account of the ensigns is true ; so I think,
that Philo may also be relied on for the truth of a fact he
has mentioned, as happening in his own time in Judea : and
consequently I judge them to be two different facts.

Agrippa, reckoning* up to Caligula the several favours
conferred on the Jews by the imperial family, says : ' Pi-

* late was procurator of Judea. He, not so much out of
' respect to Tiberius, as a malicious intention to vex the

* people, dedicates gilt shields, and places them in Herod's
' palace within the holy city. There was no figure upon
' them, nor any thing else which is forbidden, except an
' inscription, which expressed these two things, the name of
' the person who dedicated them, and of him to whom they

* were dedicated. When the people perceived what had

* been done, — they desired this innovation of the shields

* might be rectified, that their ancient customs, which had

* been preserved through so many ages, and had been

* hitherto untouched by kings and emperors, might not now

* be violated. He refused their demands with roughness :
4 such was his temper, fierce and untractable. They then

* cried out, do not you raise a sedition yourself; do not you

e Cleric. Hist. Ecc. f Basnage Ann. Pol. Eccl.

« Vid. Basnage Ann. P. E. A. 27. n. 6.
VOL. I. M

162 Credibility of the Gospel History.

4 disturb the peace by your illegal practices. — It is not

* Tiberius's pleasure, that any of our laws should be broken
4 in upon. If you have received any edict, or letter from
4 the emperor to this purpose, produce it, that we may leave
4 you, and depute an embassy to him, and entreat him to
4 revoke his orders. This put him out of all temper ; for
4 he was afraid, that if they should send an embassy, they
4 might discover the many mal-administrations of his govern-
4 ment, his extortions, his unjust decrees, his inhuman
4 cruelties. This reduced him to the utmost perplexity.
4 On the one hand, he was afraid to remove things that had
4 been once dedicated, and was also unwilling to do a fa-
4 vour to men that were his subjects : and on the other
4 hand, he knew very well the inflexible severity of Tibe-
4 rius. The chief men of the nation observing this, and
4 perceiving that he repented of what he had done, though

* he endeavoured to conceal it, write a most humble and
4 submissive letter to Tiberius. It is needless to say, how
4 he was provoked, when he had read the account of Pilate's
4 speeches and threatenings, the event showing it suffi-
4 ciently. For he soon sent a letter to Pilate, reprimanding
4 him for so audacious a proceeding, requiring also, that the
4 shields should be removed. And accordingly they were
4 carried from the metropolis to Csesarea by the sea-side,
4 called Sebaste, from your great grandfather, that they
4 might be placed in the temple there consecrated to him :
4 and there they were reposited.'11

The reader doubtless observes the several different cir
cumstances of this story from that of the ensigns, which
Josephus has told ; and particularly, that this dedication of
the shields was made some time after Pilate had been in
the province, because now he had been guilty of many
mal-practices in his government ; whereas, the fact which
Josephus has related, happened very soon after his arrival
in the province. This circumstance may be an argument,
that Philo did not take the ensigns for shields ; it being
very unlikely he should mistake the time of such an affair.

I cannot however be positive that this fact happened be
fore our Saviour's crucifixion. But yet, methinks, it may
help us to form an idea, how Pilate understood that threat
ening speech of the Jews, John xix. 12, " If thou let this
man go, thou art not Caesar's friend." For, supposing this
affair of the shields not to have happened till after our Sa
viour's crucifixion, (which however is not certain,) yet un
doubtedly Pilate had, before this time, committecl many
h Philo de leg. ad Cai. p. 1033, 1034.

The Circumstances of our Saviour" s last Sufferings. . 163

abuses. And though he might be very well satisfied, the
acquitting1 Jesus and setting- him at liberty would not be
deemed any crime, if the case was fairly stated ; yet he
might be unwilling to provoke the principal men of the
Jewish nation to send Tiberius an account of his behaviour
on other occasions. This we may the more easily credit,
not only because at all times the remonstrances of a pro
vince were very much dreaded by the prefects, but because
they were more especially so under Tiberius; Vvho was
very solicitous for the peace of his provinces, and had en
deavoured to secure them from the exactions of his officers.
And it was for this reason, as he himself said, that he suf
fered the presidents to remain in the provinces for so long"
a time, because they all endeavoured to enrich themselves,
and the shorter time they staid in them, the more eager
they were to improve it to that end.1

Thus we see how Pilate, a man chiefly swayed by a re
gard to his private interest, might be in subjection to a
clamorous and tumultuous people, in an affair in which
they pretended their religion was concerned.

IX. I have, in the second chapter, shown at large, what
power the Jewish magistracy and the Roman governor were
possessed of at this time in Judea. But the justness of the
evangelist's account upon this head (in which likewise they
are perfectly harmonious) appears to me so very material,
that I know not how to forbear making here two or three
remarks upon occasion of Pilate's pronouncing the sentence
of condemnation on Jesus ; which is a proof of his supreme
authority in that country, in capital causes.

1. According to the evangelists then, the Jews had not
now the power of life and death. I have showed, that ac
cording to other ancient authors, they had it not at this
time, and could not have it, whilst in the state of a Roman
province.

2. According to the evangelists, Pilate had the power of
life and death. So he has also in Philo and Josephus.
This is a place, in which later writers would have been in
great danger of tripping. The accuracy of the evangelists
is remarkable on two accounts. 1. Judea, though some
times called a province, was properly a branch of the pro
vince of Syria :k but yet had a Roman governor residing in

' Vid. Joseph. Ant. lib. xviii. cap. 7. sect. 5. k Ituraeique et

Judaei, defunctis regibus Sohemo atque Agrippa, Provincial Si/rice ddditi.
Tacit. Ann. 12. cap. 23. What Tacitus here says was done upon the death
of Agrippa, had been the case before his reign : and was so, particularly, in the
time of Pilate ; as is evident, in that he was displaced by Vitellius, president

M 2

164 Credibility of the Gospel History.

it with supreme authority, which was a very uncommon
thing. 2. Pilate's proper title was that of procurator. The
reader may perceive this from my translations of many
passages concerning* the Roman governors of Judea, in
which, in conformity to Josephus's style, I also call them
procurators. Tacitus also calls Pilate procurator.1 Now
this was ordinarily the title of the officer that took care of
the emperor's revenue in a province, and is equivalent to
that of quaestor under the republic, or in a province subject
to the senate ; which officer had not the power of life and
death. But Pilate, though he had the title of procurator,
had the power of a president. The evangelists, usually
give Pilate, Felix, and Festus the title of governor ; a
g'eneral word, and very proper, according to the usage of
the best writers, and of Josephus in particular, in many
places.

3. According to the evangelists, the Jewish council hav
ing, as they pretended, convicted Jesus of blasphemy, and
judged him guilty of death, they go with him to Pilate ;
and they seem to have expected that Pilate should confirm
their sentence, and sign an order that he might be punished
accordingly. And they afterwards openly and confidently
insist upon it, that he should not acquit a person who, they
said, had been guilty of a crime, which according to their
law was capital. John xix. 7, " The Jews answered him,
we have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he
made himself the son of God." This appears to me very
observable : but yet nothing* is more likely than that they
should talk in this way, since they were governed by the
Romans according to their own laws, as I have shown
above."1 These are the remarks I had to make in this
place.

But I would also take this opportunity of adding a text,
not yet insisted on, which, if I understand it aright, is a
fresh indication, that according to the sacred writers, the
Jews had not now supreme power within themselves.
When the Jewish elders had brought Jesus before Pilate,
he said to them, John xviii. 29, 30, " What accusation bring
you against this man ? They answered and said unto him,
If he were not a malefactor, we icould not have delivered
him up unto thee" The original word, and our English
word malefactor, I think, usually denote a criminal guilty
of one of the worst of crimes : such as are ordinarily punish-

of Syria. Vid. et Joseph, de Bell. lib. ii. cap. 8. sect. 1. Antiq. lib. xvii.
cap. ult. sect 5. et. alibi.
1 Ann. 15. cap. 44. See above, p. 145. n. h. m See ch. ii. p. 83.

The Circumstances of our Saviour's last Sufferings. 165

ed with death, perpetual imprisonment, the mines, galleys,
or some such very heavy punishment. These words then,
in their mouths, import thus much : 1. < If the crime he is
' charged with were not capital, we should have punished
' him ourselves, and not have come to you. 2. If he were
* not really guilty, we would not have accused him.' But
to return to the course we were in.

X. Pilate having at length passed sentence on Jesus,
and delivered him to be crucified, it will be proper next to
consider what is said of an inscription put upon the cross.
John xix. 19, 20, " And Pilate wrote a title and put it on
the cross : and the writing was, Jesus of Nazareth, the
King of the Jews." This was the usual custom of the
Romans, when any were condemned to death, to affix to the
instrument of their punishment, or to order to be carried
before them, a writing expressing the crime for which they
suffered. And this writing was called in Latin, title, which
word St. John has made use of. It will be sufficient to
give an example or two of this in the margin.11

XI. St. John says that this title was " written in Hebrew,
Greek, and Latin." And it was at this time usual at Jeru
salem, to set up advertisements, that were designed to be
read by all sorts of people, in several languages. Titus, in
a message he sent to the Jews by Josephus, when the city
was almost in his hands, and by which he endeavoured to
persuade them to surrender, says : ' Did you not erect pil-
' lars with inscriptions on them in the Greek and in our
' language, " Let no one pass beyond these bounds?"'0

XII. Every one must needs observe the scoffs and deri
sions our Saviour met with. There are three or four in
stances recorded in the evangelists. One was whilst he
was in the high priest's house. " Then did they spit in his
face and buffeted him, and others smote him with the
palms of their hands ; saying, Prophesy unto us, thou
Christ, who is he that smote thee?" Matt. xxvi. 67,68;
Mark xiv. 65. Pilate hearing our Lord was of Galilee
sent him to Herod ; and before he was dismissed by him,

11 Romae publico epulo servum, ob detractam lectis argenteam laminam,
carnifici confestim tradidit [Caius] ut, manibus abscissis, atque ante pectus e
collo pendentibus, praecedente titulo qui causam pcense indicaret, per coetus
epulantium circumduceretur. Suet, in Calig. c. 34. Patrem familias quod
Thracem mirmilloni parem, munerario imparem dixerat, detractum e specta-
culis in arenam, canibus objecit, cum hoc titulo, Impie locutus parmularius.
Sueton. Domit. cap. 10. Atot re TTJQ ayopag jwscr/jf ftera ypa^juarwv rr\v ainav
Tr]Q 3-ai/arwtrewf avro dr)\svTiov SiayayovTOQ, KCII pera ravra avcfzavpuaavTOQ'
Die, lib. liv. p. 523. A. ° Joseph, de Bell. Jud. lib. vi.

cap. 2. sect. 4.

166 Credibility of the Gospel History.

" Herod with his men of war set him at nought : and mocked
him, and arrayed him in a gorgeous robe," Luke xxiii. 11.
He was insulted and mocked by the soldiers, when Pilate
ordered him to be scourged the first time, that by that lesser
punishment he might satisfy the Jews and save his life, as
is related by St. John.? After Pilate had condemned him
to be crucified, the like indignities were repeated by the
soldiers, as we are assured by two evangelists. Matt, xxvii.
27—31 ; Mark xv. 16—20, " And they stripped him and
put on him a scarlet robe, and when they had platted a
crown of thorns, they put it on his head, and a reed in his
right hand : and they bowed the knee before him, and
mocked him, saying, Hail king of the Jews. And they spit
upon him, and took the reed, and smote him on the head."

These are tokens of contempt and ridicule which were
in use at that time. Dio, among the other indignities offer
ed to Sejanus the favourite of Tiberius, (in whose reign our
Saviour was crucified,) as they were carrying him from the
senate-house to prison, particularly mentions this ; ' That
6 they struck him on the head.'(i But there is one instance
of ridicule which happened so soon after this time, and has
so great a resemblance with what our Saviour met with,
that it ought to be set down here at length. Caligula, the
successor of Tiberius, had in the very beginning of his
reign given Agrippa the tetrarchy of his uncle Philip, being
about the fourth part of his grandfather Herod's dominions,
with the right of wearing a diadem or crown. When he
was setting out from Rome to make a visit to his people,
the Emperor advised him to go by Alexandria as the best
way. When he came thither he kept himself very private;
but the Alexandrians having got intelligence of his arrival
there, and of the design of his journey, were filled with
envy, as Philo says, at the thoughts of a Jew's having the
title of king. Many ways they showed their indignation —
one was this :

4 There was one Carabas, a sort of distracted fellow, that

* in all seasons of the year went naked about the streets.

* He was somewhat between a madman and a fool, the com-
' mon jest of boys and other idle people. This wretch they
6 brought into the theatre, and placed him on a lofty seat,

* that he might be conspicuous to all : then they put a thing
' made of paper on his head for a crown, the rest of his

* body they covered with a mat instead of a robe, arid for

* a sceptre one put into his hand a little piece of a reed

P John xix. 1, 2. See Dr. Clarke's paraphrase of these two verses.
q ETTI KopprjQ tnaiov. Dio, lib. Iviii. p. 628. A.

The Circumstances of our Saviour's last Sufferings. 167

* which he had just taken up from the ground. Having thus

* given him a mimic royal dress, several young fellows with

* poles on their shoulders came and stood on each side of

* him as his guards. Then there came people toward him,

* some to pay their homage to him, others to ask justice of

* him, and some to know his will and pleasure concerning
' affairs of state ; and in the crowd were loud and confused
4 acclamations of Maris, Man's ; that being, as they say, the

* Syriac word for lord, thereby intimating whom they in-
6 tended to ridicule by all this mock show ;r Agrippa being

* a Syrian, and king of a large country in Syria. >s

XIII. Before our Saviour was had away to be crucified he
was scourged. " Then released he Barabbas unto them ;
and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be
crucified," Matt, xxvii. 26, Mark xv. 15. That it was the
usual custom of the Romans, before execution, to scourge
persons condemned to capital punishment, is evident from
many examples recorded in ancient historians. I shall set
down from them in the margin two or three instances in the
original words.1 Accounts of the executions of persons
generally run in this form ; They were stripped, whipped,
and beheaded, or crucified, according as the sentence was.

XIV. Another particular mentioned here is, that our Sa
viour bore his cross, John xix. 16, 17, " And they took
Jesus and led him away ; and he bearing his cross went
forth." But he having been fatigued by a long examina
tion and a double scourging, (as it seems,) they were obliged
after he had gone a short way to put it upon another.
" And they laid hold on one Simon a Cyrenian : and on
him they laid the cross that he might bear it after Jesus,"
Luke xxiii. 26, Mark xv. 21.

This was the constant practice among the Romans for
criminals to carry their own cross. Insomuch that Plutarch
makes use of it as an illustration of the misery of vice :

* that every kind of wickedness produces its own particular

r Eir' £/c 7T£pi£Twro£ tv KVK\(£) TrXrjQsQ e%r)%ti f3orj TIQ aroTrog, Mapiv ctTTOKa-
\&VT(>)V' OVTWQ £e (pctffiv TOV Kvptov ovofia^taOat Trapa S?jp<H£* ydtvav yap
A-ypnnrav teat ytvti Supov, /cat Supiag ntyaXrjv airoTOfjMjv £%ovra, TJQ f/3a<ri-
\tvtrs. In Flacc. p. 970. B. C. s Judea is here reckoned

by Philo a part of Syria ; as it is also by many other writers.

1 Missique lictores ad sumendum supplicium, nudatos virgis caedunt. Liv.
lib. ii. c. 5. Productique omnes, virgisque caesi, ac securi percussi. Id. lib.
xxvi. c. 15. Ovg p.a<zi£i 7rpoaiKi(rap.tvog avvravpwae (3>Xwpoe.) Joseph, p.
1080. 45. Ma<riy8jii£voi — ave<zavp -IVTO re r£i%«f O.VTIKQV. Id. p. 1247. 24,
Zwv yap KariKavQri ?rpor£pov aiKiaQei^. Id. p. 1327. 43.

168 Credibility of the Gospel History.

' torment, just as every malefactor, when he is brought
' forth to execution, carries his own cross.'"

XV. It appears from the evangelists that our Lord was
crucified without the city. " And he bearing his cross
went forth to a place called the place of a skull, which is
called in the Hebrew Golgotha," John xix. 17. " For the
place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city," ver.
20. And the apostle to the Hebrews has likewise men
tioned this circumstance : " Wherefore Jesus also — suffered
without the gate," Heb. xiii. 12.

This is conformable to the Jewish law, and to examples
mentioned in the Old Testament. Numb. xv. 35, " And
the Lord said unto Moses, The man shall surely be put to
death : all the congregation shall stone him with stones
without the camp." 1 Kings xxi. 13, " Then they carried
him" [Naboth] " forth out of the city, and stoned him with
stones that he died." This was done at Jezreel, in the ter
ritories of the king of Israel, not far from Samaria. And
if this custom was practised there, we may be certain the
Jews did not choose that criminals should be executed
within Jerusalem, the sanctity of which they had so high
an opinion of, and which they were very zealous to preserve
free from all ceremonial impurity, though they defiled it
with the practice of the most horrid immoralities. It is
possible indeed they might, in their sudden and ungoverned
rage, a thing they were mighty subject to at this time
upon any affront offered to their laws or customs, put per
sons who thus provoked them to death, upon the spot, in
the city, or the temple, or wherever they found them : but
whenever they were calm enough to admit the form of a
legal process, I dare say, they did not approve of an exe
cution within the city.

And among the Romans this custom was very common, v
at least in the provinces. The robbers at Ephesus which w
Petronius Arbiter mentions, were crucified by order of the
governor of the province without the city. This was the
custom likewise in Sicily, as appears from Cicero. x

u Kai T(p ffdifjian ruv Ko\a£o/j«>wv IKCVZOQ TUV Ka/cspywv ttcfytpti rQv avrs
^avpov' rj Si Kaicia TU)V /coXa-j/piwv £0' iavrrjv iica^ov £, avrr]£ reKraivETai.
Plutarch, de iis qui sero puniuntur, p. 554. A. Paris. 1624.

v Credo ego istoc exemplo tibi esse eundum actutum extra portam, dispessis
manibus patibulum cum habebis. Plautus in Mil. Glor. Act. 2. Seen. iv.

w Quum interim imperator provinciae latrones jussit crucibus adfigi, secun-
dum illam eandem casulam, in qua recens cadaver matrona deflebat. Satyr.
cap. 71. x Quid enim attinuit, cum Mamertini more atque instituto

suo crucem fixissent post urbem in via Pompeia, te jubere in ea parte figere.

The Circumstances of our Saviour's last Sufferings. 169

XVI. All the four evangelists have particularly men
tioned our Saviour's burial : that " Joseph of Arimathea
went to Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus ; Then Pi
late commanded the body to be delivered. And when Jo
seph had taken the body, he laid it in his own new tomb,"
Matt. xvii. 58—60; Mark xv. 45, 46; Luke xxiii. 50—53;
John xix. 38 — 40. And it may be fairly concluded, the
rulers of the Jews did not disapprove of it : since they
were solicitous that the bodies might be taken down, and
not hang on the cross the next day. John xix. 31, " The
Jews therefore," says St. John, " because it was the prepa
ration, that the bodies should not remain on the cross on
the sabbath-day, (for that sabbath-day was an high day,)
besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that
they might be taken away."

Burial was not always allowed by the Romans in these
cases. For we find that sometimes a soldier was appointed
to guard the bodies of malefactors, that they might not be
taken away and buried. y However it seems that it was
not often refused, unless the criminals were very mean, and
infamous. Cicero reckons it one of the horrid crimes of
Verres's administration in Sicily, that he would take money
of parents for the burial of their children whom he had put
to death. z Both Suetoniusa and Tacitus b represent it as
one of the uncommon cruelties of Tiberius in the latter part
of his reign, that he generally denied burial to those who
were put to death, by his orders, at Rome. Ulpian in his
treatise of the Duty of a Proconsul says ; ' The bodies of
' those who are condemned to death are not to be denied to

* their relations : and Augustus writes in the tenth book of
' his own life, that he had been wont to observe this cus-
'tom;'c that is, to grant the bodies to relations. Paulus
says : ' that the bodies of those who have been punished,

* [with death,] are to be given to any that desire them in
' order to burial.' d

quae ad fretum spectaret. in Verr. lib. v. c. 66. n. 169. y Miles cruces

asservabat, ne quis ad sepulturam corpora datraheret. Petron. Arb. Satyr, c.
71. z Rapiunt eura ad supplicium dii patrii ; quod iste in-

ventus est, qui e complexu parentum abreptos filios ad necem duceret, et
parentes pretium pro sepultura posceret. In Verr. lib. i. cap. 3.

a Nemo punitorum non et in Gemonias abjectus, uncoque tractus. Vit.
Tiber, c. 61. b Et quia damnati, publicatis bonis, sepultura pro-

hibebantur. Ann. lib. vi. cap. 29. c Corpora eorum qui

capite damnantur cognatis ipsorum neganda non sunt : et id se observasse
etiam D. Aug. lib. x. de Vita sua, scribit. Hodie autem eorum, in quos
animadvertitur, corpora non aliter sepeliuntur, quam si fuerit petitum et per-
missum ; et nonnunquam non permittitur, maxime majestatis causa damnato-
rum. 1. i. ff. de cadaver. Punit. d Corpora animadversorum quibuslibet

170 Credibility of the Gospel History.

It is evident therefore from these two lawyers, that the
governors of provinces had a right to grant burial to the
bodies of those who had been executed by their order :
nay, they seem to intimate, that it ought not usually to be
denied when requested by any.

We may then depend upon it, that burial was ordinarily
allowed to persons put to death in Judea. The law of
Moses is express, that malefactors should be buried. Deut.
xxi. 22, 23, " And if a man have committed a sin worthy
of death, and he be put to death, and thou hang him on a
tree, his body shall not remain all night on the tree, but
thou shalt in any wise bury him that day — that thy land
be not defiled." And the later Jews retained a reverence
for this law. A body of the Idumeans having been let
into Jerusalem by the zealots, in order to strengthen their
party ; after the mention of very great barbarities they had
committed in the city and in the temple, Josephus gives
their neglect to bury those whom they had murdered, as
one of the strongest proofs of their wickedness. * They

* came,' says he, ' to such impiety, as to * throw out men
' unburied, though the Jews had so great concern for burial,

* as to take down and bury before sun-set those who were
' crucified by a legal sentence.'6 Since burial was so
strictly required by the Mosaic law, and was so agreeable
to the sentiments and inclinations of the Jewish people, we
have all the reason in the world to suppose it was seldom
denied by the Roman governors in that country.

XVII. St. John says, ch. xix. 39, 40, " There came also
Nicodemus, and brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes,
about an hundred pound weight. Then took they [Joseph
of Arimathea and Nicodemus] the body of Jesus, and
wound it in linen clothes, with the spices, as the manner of
the Jews is to bury." This may seem to some a large
quantity of spices to be bestowed on a single body at its
interment. And it has been made an objection by a mo-
'dernf Jew against the history of the New Testament. And
yet, according to St. Mark and St. Luke, Mary Magdalene
and some other women having* observed the " sepulchre,
and where the body was laid," went and " brought sweet
petentibus ad sepulturam danda sunt. 1. iii. eod. e Hpor}\Qov St tig

TOCT8TOV a(T£]3f ICLQ , WT£ KCll (ITCKp&g pltyai, KCttTOl TOff(WTr)V Is^ai(t)V 7T£pt TO.Q TCtfydQ

>T£ Kdi rag (K KaraiKrjQ ava^avpsfievsg ?rpo
KaOtXtiv TS teat ScnrTiiv. De B. J. 1. iv. c. 5. sect. 2.

f Amram, in B. Kidder, affirms, that this was enough for two hundred dead
bodies, and that it could not be carried with less than the strength of a mule,
and therefore not by Nicodemus. Kidder's Demonstrat. of the Messias, Part
III. ch. iii. sect. 11.

The Circumstances of our Saviour's last Sufferings. 171

spices, that they might anoint him. And on the first day
of the week, early in the morning1, they came to the sepul
chre, bringing the spices which they had prepared," Mark
xvi. 1, Luke xxiii. 55, 56, xxiv. 1.

But the largeness of this quantity will not surprise any
who consider the Jewish custom ; and that they were wont
not only to embalm or anoint the body, but to lay it also in
a bed of spices. It is said of Asa, 2. Chron, xvi. 14, " They
buried him in the bed which was filled with sweet odours,
and divers kinds of spices prepared by the apothecaries'
art : and they made a very great burning for him." The
Jews of this time seem not to have fallen short of their an
cestors in this kind of expense : for Josephus in the ac
count of Herod's funeral procession says : « The soldiery
' was followed by five hundred slaves and free-men bearing
* sweet spices.' & He mentions the same number in the
War, and in the Antiquities. It is likely there were spices
here for a burning, as well as for a bed to lay Herod's
body in.

It is likewise objected by the same Jew, that the quantity
of spices mentioned by St. John was a load for a mule, and
therefore could not be carried by Nicodemus. One would
not have expected such an objection from a reasonable
creature, who might know it to be a very just, as well as
common way of speaking, to ascribe to any person that
which is done by his order or direction. St. John has made
particular mention of Joseph and Nicodemus as present at
the burial of Jesus. They were both of them men of sub
stance, and may be supposed to have ordered the attend
ance of some of their servants on this occasion.

8 HevTctKocrioi fie. UTT' avroig rwv OIKKTWV nai cnrtXtvOspiov ajowjuaro^opoi. de B.
J. 1. i. C. ult. sect. 9. T«roig inrovro TrtvraKoaioi oixtTwv apw/iaro0opot. Antiq.
lib. xvii. c. 8. sect. 3. As Bishop Kidder has not quoted these passages, I
hope they will not be unacceptable here.

172 Credibility of the Gospel History.

CHAP. VIII.

OF THE TREATMENT WHICH THE APOSTLES AND OTHER

DISCIPLES OF JESUS MET WITH FROM JEWS

AND GENTILES.

I. The malice of the Jews against the first Christians, and
the favour showed to them by governors and other
Roman officers, according to St. Luke. II. Proofs of
the Jewish malice from other writers. III. The Romans
at this time protected all people in the observation of
their several religious rites. IV. The Jews in particular.
V. Instances of the justice and equity of Roman govern
ors to men of different religions. VI. Jin objection con-
sidered. VII. Three observations for clearing up this
matter. VIII. A difficulty removed; and the conclusion.

I. THERE is no one that has read the New Testament,
but must have observed the implacable malice of the Jews
not only against our Saviour, but also against the apostles ;
and the heat and rage with which they opposed them, not
only in Judea, but likewise in all other countries where
they met with them, because they did not practise and re
commend all their particular rites and traditions. But the
Roman officers and governors were far from being equally
offended with the neglect they showed of their religion, and
usually protected them from the injuries the Jews would
have done them.

At Thessalonica, Acts xvii. 5—9, " The Jews which be
lieved not, moved with envy, took unto them certain lewd
fellows of the baser sort, and gathered a company, and set
all the city in an uproar, and assaulted the house of Jason,
and sought to bring them [Paul and Silas] out to the
people. And when they found them not, they dre\v Jason
and certain of the brethren unto the rulers of the city, cry
ing, These that have turned the world upside down, are
coine hither also, whom Jason has received, and these all
do contrary to the decrees of Caesar, saying, that there is
another king, one Jesus. And they troubled the people
and the rulers of the city, when they heard these things.
And when they had taken security of Jason, and the other,
[brethren,] they let them go." This was a piece of great
goodness. The magistrates did not imprison Jason and

The Treatment of the Apostles by Jews and Gentiles. 173

those with him, but took their security that Paul and Silas
should appear if called for ; which it is likely they never
were.

St. Paul preached a year and six months at Corinth, and
the Jews commenced a warm prosecution against him. But
it was impossible to move Gallio, elder brother of Seneca
the stoic philosopher, and then deputy of Achaia, to give
any judgment upon the case. He protected Paul from their
rage, stopped the prosecution, and did not so much as g-ive
Paul the trouble of replying. Acts xviii. 11—16, " And
he continued there [at Corinth] a year and six months,
teaching the word of God among them. And when Gallio
was deputy of Achaia, the Jews made insurrection with one
accord against Paul, and brought him to the judgment seat,
saying, This fellow persuadeth men to worship God con
trary to the law. And when Paul was now about to open
his mouth, Gallio said unto the Jews, If it were a matter of
wrong or wicked lewdness, O ye Jews, reason would that I
should bear with you. But if it be a question of words and
names, and of your law, look ye to it, for I will be no
judge of such matters. And he drave them from the judg
ment seat."

At Ephesus, Demetrius a silversmith, " which made sil
ver shrines for Diana, with the workmen of like occupation,"
made a speech to the people in behalf of themselves and
their goddess ; insomuch that " the whole city was filled
with confusion, and having caught Gaius and Aristarchus,
men of Macedonia, Paul's companions in travel, they rushed
with one accord into the theatre. And when Paul would
have entered in unto the people, the disciples suffered him
not." And " certain of" the chief of Asia, " which were
his friends, sent unto him, desiring him that he would not
adventure himself into the theatre," Acts xix. 24 — 31.

By " the chief men of Asia," or Asiarchs, as it is in the
Greek, a we are to understand the rulers of the games of Asia.b
It is generally supposed they were priests. But if they
were not always priests, it is certain, that the rulers of
games were magistrates of considerable wealth and reputa
tion. And it was a piece of civility in them to send Paul
a message from the theatre to advise him of the temper of
the people, and to dissuade him from coming thither.

The town-clerk went yet farther, for he reprimanded the
people who had been drawn into a riot by Demetrius and the
other artificers and their workmen : assuring them, they

a TVec fc Kai Twv Affiapx^v. Polit. Ecc. A. 55. n. 7.
b Vid. Grot, et Whitb. in loc. Basnage, Ann.

174 Credibility of the Gospel History.

might depend upon having- justice done them according- to
the law, but that for this assembly they had deserved to be
punished. Acts xix. 35 — 40, " And when the town-clerk
had appeased the people, he said, Ye men of Ephesus, what
man is there that knoweth not how that the city of the
Ephesians is a worshipper of the great goddess Diana ?—
seeing- then that these things cannot be spoken against, ye
ought to be quiet and to do nothing rashly. For ye have
brought hither these men, which are neither robbers of
churches, nor yet blasphemers of your goddess. Where
fore if Demetrius and the craftsmen — have a matter against
any man, the law is open ; and there are deputies, let them
implead one another. But if ye inquire any thing concern
ing other matters, it shall be determined in a lawful as
sembly. For we are in danger to be called in question for
this day's uproar, there being no cause whereby we may
give an account of this concourse." He blames the tumul
tuous assembly, and asserts the innocence of Paul and his
companions, for as much as they had not been guilty of
sacrilege, or of reviling their goddess ; that is, had done
nothing against religion that was punishable by the laws.

When the Jews had seized St. Paul at Jerusalem with
intent to kill him, neither Lysias, the chief captain there,
nor Felix the governor to whom Lysias sent him, nor Fes-
tus his successor, would condemn him, though earnestly
importuned by the Jews. Acts xxii. xxiv. xxv.

St. Paul had made but a short progress in his voyage
from Csesarea to Rome, before he received a particular
civility from Julius " a centurion of Augustus's band," to
whom he and the other prisoners were committed. Acts xx vii.
2, 3, " And entering into a ship of Adramyttium, we
launched, meaning to sail by the coasts of Asia. — And the
next day we touched at Sidon. And Julius courteously
entreated Paul, and gave him liberty to go unto his friends
to refresh himself."

When the apostle and his company were shipwrecked in
their voyage to Rome, the soldiers formed a design " to kill
the prisoners, lest they should escape. But the (foremen-
tioned) centurion," who had the charge of them, " kept
them from their purpose, being willing to save Paul," Acts
xxvii. 42, 43.

, And when he came to Rome he was well used there.
" The centurion delivered the prisoners to the captain of the
guard : but Paul was suffered to dwell by himself with a
soldier that kept him. There he dwelt two whole years in
his own hired house and received all that came in unto

The Treatment of the Apostles by Jews and Gentiles. 175

him, preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching- those
things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ with all con
fidence, no man forbidding him," Acts xxviii. 16, 30, 31.
And there is no doubt but that he was quite freed from
these bonds, and travelled again into Asia, Phil. i. 25.
ii. 24.

We have here not one only but many instances of lenity, or
justice at least, in the Roman officers or governors, toward
Paul and other the first followers of Jesus : some in one
place, and some in another : at Thessalonica, Corinth,
Ephesus, in Judea, at Rome. These officers withstood the
tumults, remonstrances, solicitations of the Jews of all cha
racters, and of the common people of their own religion.

These facts did not all happen in one and the same
reign. Pilate made some efforts to set Jesus at liberty in
the reign of Tiberius. Gallic was deputy of Achaia under
Claudius. Felix was sent into Judea by Claudius ; but the
justice which he and Festus did Paul was in the time of
Nero. And it was from the captain of the guard or chief
favourite of this same emperor, that he received so good
treatment at Rome.

If Gallio only, who was a man of much wit and good
sense,c and of a sweet and gentle disposition,*1 and, (if we
may credit his brother,) of much generosity and virtue, e
had protected the first followers of Jesus from the inquiries
which were offered them, we might have ascribed such con
duct to his eminent qualifications. But Felix was infamous
for his exactions and other crimes, not in Judea only, but at
Rome ; and yet he could not be brought to condemn Paul.

Not that I think that Felix did Paul all the justice he
ought to have done ; far from it. After the first hearing of
Paul and the chief priests and elders at Coesarea, be ought
to have released him: and his detaining- an innocent man
in prison so long as he did Paul, and leaving him in chains
when he went out of the province, were very unrighteous
actions.

St. Luke says, Acts xxiv. 27, " But after two years Por-
cius Festus came into Felix' room : and Felix willing to
show the Jews a pleasure, left Paul bound." I believe

c Vid. Dion. Cass. lib. Ixi. p. 689. init. d Nemo enim

mortaliura uni tarn dulcis est quam hie omnibus. Senec. Nat. Quaest. 1. iv.
in Praef. e Solebam tibi dicere, Gallionem fratrem meum

(quern nemo non parum amat, etiam qui amare plus non potest) alia vitia non
nosse, hoc etiam odisse. — Hoc quoque loco blanditiis tuis restitit, ut exclamares
invenisse te inexpugnabilem virum adversus insidias, quas nemo non in sinum
recipit. Id. ibid.

176 Credibility of the Gospel History.

that Felix at this time showed the Jews a double pleasure ;
released robbers and other criminals, and " left Paul bound."
The former pleasure St. Luke has omitted, according* to his
great candour and moderation, observable upon divers oc
casions in other parts of his history. But I make very
little doubt but it was now done. Josephus has particu
larly taken notice that Albinus, successor of Porcius Festus,
did so when he left the province, and that he aimed at
pleasing* the Jews in it. Josephus says, that thereby the
prisons were emptied, but the country was filled with rob
bers/ Felix and Albinus were both of them disagreeable
in their administration. It is likely they both took the
same method of pacifying the Jews at the conclusion. Per
haps Felix's conduct was the pattern Albinus followed ;
nor was it, I suppose, an uncommon thing-, for governors to
release some prisoners at their leaving a province.

Porcius Festus was also manifestly unjust to Paul, in
that he did not set him at liberty, but constrained him to
appeal to Coesar.

But though they did not do Paul all the justice which
they ought to have done, yet they did not condemn him to
death as the Jews desired. It is plain they withstood very
pressing* solicitations, and possibly, considerable offers of
money. Felix gave him a great deal of liberty after the
first hearing* at Caesarea, Acts xxiv. 23, which we may sup
pose was also allowed by Festus. Though they had nei
ther of them resolution enough to release Paul against the
inclinations of the people of their province, they both give
plain indications they thought him an innocent man. And
it cannot be questioned but that Festus transmitted a fa
vourable account of him to Rome.

In order to find out the true reason and foundation of
this conduct, I mean the favour showed to the disciples of
Jesus by the Roman officers, it is needful to consider the
grounds they go upon, and the reasons they themselves as
sign for it, as represented by St. Luke.

The reader will recollect the speeches of Gallio, and the
town clerk of Ephesus, so that 1 need not repeat any part
of them here. The substance of them all is, in short, in the
letter which Lysias sent with Paul to Felix at Caesarea.
" And when I would have known the cause, wherefore they
accused him, I brought him forth into their council, whom
I perceived to be accused of questions of their law, but to
have nothing laid to his charge worthy of death, or of
bonds." Acts xxiii. 28, 29.

f Jos. Ant. lib. xx. c. 8. sect. 5.

The Treatment of the Apostles by Jews and Gentiles. 177

And with this agrees also the account, which Festus gave
of Paul's affair at length to king Agrippa, Acts xxv. 13 —
27. " And after certain days, king AgTippa and Bernice
came unto Csesarea to salute Festus. And when they had
been there many days, Festus declared Paul's cause unto
the king, saying, There ITS a certain man left in bonds by
Felix. About whom, when I was at Jerusalem, the chief
priests and the elders of the Jews informed me, desiring to have
judgment against him. To whom I answered, it is not the
manner of the Romans to deliver any man to die, before
that he which is accused have the accusers face to face. —
Therefore when they were come hither without any delay,
on the morrow I sat on the judgment-seat, and I command
ed the man to be brought forth. Against whom when the
accusers stood up, they brought none accusations of such
things as I supposed : but had certain questions against
him of their own superstition, and of one Jesus, which was
dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive. And because I
doubted of such manner of questions, I asked him, whether
he would go to Jerusalem, and there be judged of these
matters. But when Paul had appealed to be reserved unto
the hearing of Augustus, I commanded him to be kept till
1 might send him to Csesar. Then Agrippa said unto Fes
tus, I would also hear the man myself: — And on the mor
row, when Agrippa was come, and Bernice, with great
pomp, — at Festus' commandment Paul was brought forth.
And Festus said, King Agrippa, and all men which are
here present with us, ye see this man, about whom all the
multitude of the Jews have dealt with me, both at Jerusa
lem, and also here, crying out, that he ought not to live any
longer. But when I found that he had committed nothing
worthy of death, and that he himself hath appealed to Au
gustus, I have determined to send him. Of whom / have
no certain thing to write unto my lord ; wherefore I have
brought him forth before you, and especially before thee, O
king Agrippa, that after examination had, / might have
somewhat to write. For it seemeth to me unreasonable to
send a prisoner, and not withal to signify the crimes laid
against him."

Strange ! Felix, it is likely, left behind him some memo
rial concerning this prisoner, and Festus had given Paul
and his accusers a solemn hearing at Csesarea : the high
priest and the elders, and all the multitude of the Jews, had
dealt with him about Paul once and again, at Jerusalem,
and at Csesarea : Festus seems to have spared no pains to
go to the bottom of the matter: and yet after all, he

VOL. i. N

178 Credibility of the Gospel History.

brought him before A'grippa, that he " might have some
what to write to Augustus." According to this account,
the Roman empire must have had no laws, at this time,
against new sects in religion, or the leaders of them, pro
vided they injured no man's civil property, and gave no
disturbance to other people in their worship.

Let us however see the progress of this examination be
fore Agrippa and Bernice, and those who wrere with them,
Acts xxvi. 4 — 23. Paul acquaints them with the manner
of his life from the first, informs them of his conversion,
freely declares his principles and conduct ; tells them, that
he had " seen a light from heaven, and heard a voice ;"
that he had been sent unto the " Gentiles, to open their eyes,
and to turn them from darkness to light, that they might
receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them that
are sanctified by faith that is in Jesus." He lets them know,
that he had not been " disobedient to the heavenly vision,
but showed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem,
and throughout all the coasts of Judea, and then to the
Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God ;— that
having obtained help of God, he continued unto this day,
witnessing both to small and great, that Christ should suf
fer, and that he should be the first that should rise from
the dead, and should show light unto the people and to the
Gentiles,"

Paul here acknowledgeth two things, most contrary to
the general opinion of the Jews at that time ; first, " that
Christ should suffer," and secondly, he mentions particu
larly his commission " to go to the Gentiles ;" which thing,
when he related in his speech to the people at Jerusalem,
Acts xxii. 22, 23, " they lift up their voices, and said,
Away with such a fellow from the earth ; for it is riot fit
that he should live." And he now declares, that he had
propagated these principles every where with all his
might.

Well, what is the result? Why, truly, Paul's discourse
appears to Festus so extravagant, that he tells him he was
" beside himself;" only he softens the charge a little, by
subjoining, that it was " much learning" that " made him
mad." But still there was no crime discerned. Nay, after
all this, Paul had the presence of mind to deliver a solemn
wish, that not only Agrippa, but also " all that heard him
that day, were not only almost, but altogether such as he
was, except his bonds. And when he had thus spoken,
the king rose up, and Bernice, and they that sat with them.
And when they were gone aside, they talked between them-

The Treatment of the Apostles by Jews and Gentiles. 179

selves, saying', this man doth nothing" worthy of death, or of
bonds. Then said Agrippa, (a Jew, but well acquainted
with the Roman constitution,) This man might have been set
at liberty, if he had not appealed unto Ccesar," Acts xxvi.
30-32.

The sum, I think, is this; that since St. Paul had affirm
ed in his defence before Felix, ch. xxiv. 12, that " they had
not found him in the temple disputing with any man, nei
ther raising- up the people, neither in the synagogues, nor
in the city ;" and before Festus, ch. xxv. 8, that " neither
against the law, neither against the temple, nor yet against
Csesar, had he offended any thing at all :" And, since the
Jews had brought no proofs of any such offences, but only
there were some differences between Paul and the Jews,
concerning " certain questions of their own superstition"
[religion] ; Paul was an innocent man, and might have been
very justly set at liberty, and left to himself to go and pro
pagate his principles in the way he had done hitherto.

This then was the reason of this conduct ; they were not
used to interpose their authority in differences purely reli
gious : there was no act of sedition, injustice, or violence
proved against Paul, or any of his companions : and these
were the only things which these officers had a right to
punish.

Here are therefore two things, which we are to look for
some foreign proof of; namely, the fierce opposition made
by the Jews against the followers of Jesus Christ ; and
then, in the next place, that the Roman officers had no
right, according to the constitution of the Roman govern
ment at that time, to punish men for innocent principles,
but only for wicked practices.

II. To the first point, the proceedings of the Jews, little
needs to be said. Their character & for violence is so al
lowed, that no one can well suspect the evangelists have
misrepresented them : not to say, that it was by no means
their interest to say these things of them if not true. I
shall however allege a passage or two to this purpose.
Justin Martyr, in his Dialogue with Trypho, written about
the 140th h year of the Christian sera, says, that in his time,

* the Jews cursed1 in their synagogues all that believed, in

* Christ. This/ says he, ' is all you can do. You have

* not now the power of killing us yourselves, because others

8 IloXXa p,fv Srj KO.I dfiva KO.I oi lafiaioi TSQ 'Pai/iaiag tdpaffav (TO yap rot
y«vo£ avTwv, Sv/juoOtv Triicporarov £<rr) Dio. 1. lix. p. 405. D.

h Vid. Pagi, Critic, in Baron. A. C. 148. ' Karapw^evot tv

raw- ffvvayoiyatQ vjuwv rag Tri<?tvovras t iri rov Xpisw. Dialog, p. 234. B.

N2

180 Credibility of the Gospel History.

4 have the governing of things. But this you have done,

* whenever you have been able. Nor have any other peo-

* pie showed so much enmity against us and Christ as you,
' who have been likewise the authors of all those prejudices,
' which others have conceived against that righteous per-
' son and us his followers. For after that you had crucified

* that one unblamable and righteous man, (by whose stripes
' they are healed who go to the Father through him,) when

* you knew that he was risen from the dead, and ascended
' up into heaven, according as the prophecies had foretold
' he should, you were so far from repenting of your evil
' deeds, that you sent out from Jerusalem chosen men into
' all the world, giving out that the sect of the Christians is

* atheistical, and saying all those evil things of us, which

* they, who know us not, do still say of us.'k And Ter-
tullian affirms the same thing ; * That the Jews were the
' principal authors of the evil reports which were spread
' abroad concerning the Christians.'1

III. Moderation and equity toward men of a different
religion are more uncommon things. And therefore, it will
be needful to be more particular on this head, and to ac
count for the protection, which the heathen officers gave
St. Paul and others, when the multitude would have mob
bed them, or when the Jewish magistrates demanded a ju
dicial sentence against them.

I shall therefore show, that the Roman people did at this
time protect all men in the practice of their several religious
rites and institutions.

In the first place I shall consider, how they treated the
heathen people in those provinces which they had sub
dued.

And secondly, I shall give a brief account of the treat
ment which the Jews received from them.

1. I shall consider how they treated the heathen people,
in those provinces which they subdued to their obedience.

Livy informs us, that the Anagnini, a people in Italy,
having disobliged the Romans, the senate took away from
them several privileges, which they had let them enjoy to
that time. ' Their senates were dissolved, and their magis-
' trates were deprived of all power and authority, except
' what was necessary for the administration of their religious

* rites.' m This was done in the year of the city 449, before

k Ibid. C. D. ! Et credidit vulgus Judaeo. Quod enim

aliud genus seminarium est infamise nostrae ? Tertul. ad Nat. 1. i. c. 14.

m Anagninis, quique arma Romanis intulerant — concilia, connubiaque
adempta : $t magistratibus, prseterquam sacrorum. curatione, interdictum. Liv,

The Treatment of the Heathens by the Romans. 181

Christ 305 ; and is a proof, that they esteemed all men's
religion inviolable.

The people of Syracuse in Sicily had an ancient custom
of choosing an annual priest to Jupiter. It is one of the
heavy charges which Cicero brings against Verres, that
whilst he was prsetor of that province, he had obstructed
the people there, in the usual method of the choice, in or^
der to get into the priesthood a creature of his own.n

Verres had a strong fancy for fine0 statues : and, when
ever he had seen any such in any town or city, as he tra
velled in his province, he would send to the people, and
inform them of a desire he had to purchase of them the
statue of such or such a god or goddess. Sometimes the
people out of fear of his resentments complied with his de
sires, though with much regret. But others were more re
solute, and told him plainly, such things could not be done
without impiety. However this wretch (as Cicero says)
would send his servants in the night time to steal images,
which the people refused to part with. There was a statue
of Ceres at Enna, which stood in an open place before her
temple. ' The curious workmanship of it was a strong

* temptation, but its bulk obstructed a clandestine removal.
' She held in her right hand a beautiful image of victory.

* This he caused to be taken away and brought to his
6 house.' P

This statue of Ceres was, it seems, in great veneration at
Rome, as well as in Sicily. Let us now hear what Cicero
says to the judges upon the trial of Verres. * Heal, O ye
'judges, the wounds given to the religion of your allies;
' preserve your own. For this is not the branch of any
' foreign or strange religion. But if it were, and if
' you did not see fit to adopt it into your own religion,

* yet you ought to be willing to secure it by an exem-
' plary punishment of him who has offered to violate

* it."i

lib. ix. cap. 43. n. 24. n Sacerdotia : quibus in rebus

non solum jura, sed etiam deorum religiones immortalium omnes repudiavit.
Syracusis lex est de religione, quge in annos singulos Jovis sacerdotem sortito
capi jubebat, &c. in Verr. lib. ii. cap. 51.

0 Deum denique nullum Siculis, qui ei paulo magis affabre atque aatiquo
artificio factus videretur, reliquit. In Verr. act. i. 1. c. 5. n. 14.

P Ante aedem Cereris in aperto et propatulo loco signa duo sunt, Cereris
unum, alterum Triptolemi, jet pulcherriraa et perampla. His pulchritudo
periculo, amplitude saluti fuit, quod eorum demolitio atque asportatio per-
difficilis videbatur. Insistebat in manu Cereris dextra simulachrum pulcherri-
me factum Victorias. Hoc ille e signo Cereris avellendum asportandumque
curavit. In Verr. lib. iv. cap. 49. n. 110.

° Medemini religioni sociorum, judices : conservate vestram. Neque enirn.

182 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Of all heathen rites within the bounds of the Roman em
pire, the Egyptian seem to have been the most different
from those of the Romans. They were contemned and ridi
culed by the emperors, by Augustus in particular/ and by
the Roman8 authors. And, if we may credit Philo, no
strangers came into Egypt, but they were tempted to laugh
at them, and banter them, till they became accustomed to
those absurdities : and all travellers of good sense were
wont to be filled with the utmost astonishment, joined with
pity.*

But yet they were practised, without any molestation
from the Romans : and continued to be so, long after the
time I am at present concerned with.u

It is true the Egyptian rites were more than once pro
hibited in the city of Rome. Augustus * laid a restraint
' upon them, and forbade the performing them in the city or
' suburbs, or within five hundred paces of the suburbs.' v
And by Tiberius's order ' the temple of Isis at Rome was
* demolished, and her image thrown into the Tiber.' w But
then this was for an high offence ; and because her priests,
under the cloak of religion, had promoted acts of de-

hsec externa vobis religio, neque aliena : quod si esset, si suscipere earn nolletis ;
taraen in eo, qui violasset, sancire vos velle oporteret. Ibid. cap. 51. n. 114.
-- Sancire (inquit Servius) est sanguine fuso confirmare. Hinc noster in orat.
pro Bald. Sanctiones ait sacrandas aut genere ipso, ut obtestatione et consecra-
tione legisj aut pcena, cum caput ejus qui contra facit consecratur. Hotom.
not. in loc. r Km TTTIQ avTi]Q TCLVTIIQ curias, &Be TQ ATTI^I

tVTv\(.iv rj9t\r]fft' Xeywv 0£8C» aXX' 8%i fi&G> Trpoaicvveiv tiQtaOai. Dio. 1. li.
p. 455. A. . s Omne fere genus bestiarum jEgyptii con-

secraverunt. Cic. de Nat. Deor. lib. iii. cap. 15.
--- Qualia demens

portenta colat ! Crocodilon adorat
Pars haec ---- Illic
Oppida tota canem venerantur, nemo Dianam.

Juv. Sat. xv. in.

1 *Qv TI av yevoiTO KaraysXaTorfpov ; Kai fir) rwv £fvwv ol Trpwrov tig
TOV a<f)iKO[ievoi, Trpiv TOV ty^a>ptoj/ TvQov rate, diavoiaig eiaoiKiGaaOai,
KO.GI %\£V(I)%OVT££' O(TOI fit TTaiStiaQ opOrjQ tyevaavTO, Tr]v £?r' affffjivoig Trp
trtHVOTToiiav KaraTrXaytvrff, OIKTI^OVTUI TXQ xpwjutvsg. Philo de Decalogo. p.

755. E. U Ol ^£ AlJVTTTlOl Kdl rtlXspae, KCtl KpOKodtl\SQ, KClt

o<t>£i£, Kai aaTTiSag, Kai KvvctQ, &e&£ vofii^saiv' KO.I TSTOIQ iraaiv CTrirpCTrtrt KCII
vfifig Kai ol vopoi. Athenag. Legat. p. 2. A Parisiis. 1636. Nemo se ab invito
coli volet, ne homo quidem : atque ideo et /Egyptiis permissa est tarn vanse
superstitionis potestas, avibus et bestiis consecrandis, et capite damnandis qui
aliquem hujusmodi deum occiderint. Unicuique etiam provincise et civitati
sums deus est. - Sed nos soli arcemur a religionis proprietate. Sed apud vos
quodvis colere jus est, prseter Deurn verum. Tertul. Apol. cap. 24.

v Ta Tf. if pa TO. AtyfTrria eTrsiffiovra avOic, tf TO a<zv avt^tiXtv' a-mnr^v p,r]-
$£va fjujde ev r^> 7rpoa<r£i^> aura IVTOQ oyfioov r'mi^aSiov TTOUIV* Dio. lib. liv,
•p. 525. A, w Joseph. Ant. 1. xviii. cap. 4. sect. 4.

The Treatment of the Jews by the Romans. 183

bauchery which were ruinous of the peace of families, and
that in the very temple itself which she had at Rome.x

And Flaccus the president of Egypt,^ in the latter end
of the reign of Tiberius, prohibited their fellowships at
Alexandria ; which they held under a pretence of religion
indeed, but made use of for drunkenness only and such
like excesses : on other accounts they met with no inter
ruptions.

And those sacred rites which were more properly their
own, were as severely restrained, when they were known to
be abused to the like infamous practices. For this reason
the Bacchanalia were prohibited at Rome and throughout
Italy by a decree of the senate.2 A. U. 568, before Christ
186.

That I may not enter into needless particulars, I shall take
notice here of but one thing more. Philo says, that when
the Jews waited on Petronius president of Syria, to entreat
him not to proceed as yet to erect the statue of Caligula at
Jerusalem, they desired that he would give them leave to
send an embassy to the emperor : ' Possibly, say they, we

* may obtain thus much, not to be treated worse than the
' meanest of all people, whose religion is preserved invio-

* late.'a

IV. In the second place I shall give a brief account of
the treatment which the Jews had from the Romans.

The Jews received very considerable favours and privi
leges from Alexander ; and they enjoyed the same under
his successors in Syria and Egypt, though with some inter
ruptions, especially in Syria. b But I intend not to go so
high as this. I take notice of this only, because the Jews
enjoyed under the Romans the most extensive privileges out
of Judea, which had been granted by Alexander and his
immediate successors; and because the privileges which
they received first from them, seem to have been in a great

x Id. ibid. y Toe rt traipetag KOI twoting, at att tiri

7rpo0a<r£i Sruffiwv etTiwvro, roi£ Trpayjuaow ep,Trapoiva(rai, tiieXve. Philo, in
Flac. p. 9G5. D. * Deinde senatusconsulto cautum est, Ne

qua Bacchanalia Romae, neve in Italia essent. Si quis tale sacrum solenne et
necessarium duceret, nee sine religione et piaculo se id omittere posse, apud
praetorem urbanum profiteretur ; praetor senatum consuleret ; si ei permissum
esset, quura in senatu non minus centum essent, ita id sacrum faceret, dum ne
plus quinque sacrificio interessent : neu qua pecunia communis, neu quis
magister sacrerum, aut sacerdos esset. Liv. lib. xxxix. cap. 18.

a Ta^a 7T8 7rpta(3tv<Tap,tvoi 7rtiffop.tv, — TJ Trept TS fir) TTCLVTWV, Kai TIOV tv
ta^anaiQ tQvuv, oig TtTrjprjTat TO. Trarpia, tXarrov svt-fKaaQai. Philo, de Leg.
ad Cai. p. 1026. E. b Vid. Joseph. Ant. lib. xii. cap,

3. sect 1. Contr. Apion. lib. ii. sect. 4.

184 Credibility of the Gospel History.

measure the models of those immunities which were granted
by the Romans.

For Josephus says, that * Seleucus Nicator gave them
4 [the Jews] the privileges of citizens in all the cities which
4 he built in Asia and in lower Syria, and even in Antioch
* the metropolis of his kingdom, and made them equal to
4 the Macedonians and Grecians ; which rights0 they still
4 enjoy.'

When Flaccus the prsetor of Asia was accused d at Rome
of several mal-administrations in that province, one of the
charges brought against him was, that he by an edict had
forbid the Jews of Asia to send any money out of that pro
vince to Jerusalem. Cicero endeavours to defend Flaccus's
conduct in this as well as other matters; but Cicero6 owns,
that the Jews did then send money to Jerusalem annually
from Italy, and from all the provinces subject to the com
monwealth. The bringing' a charge against Flaccus upon
this head is a proof that his edict was a novelty. Nor does
Cicero produce an instance of a like restraint laid upon the
Jews before this, by the president of any province, which
he certainly would have done if there had been any.

There were after this several decrees passed by Julius
Coesar and the senate of Rome, in favour of the Jews who
lived in Alexandria, Syria, and Asia; which were lodged
in the capitol at Rome, and copies of them directed to the
cities in which the Jews dwelt ; requiring the magistrates
of those cities to put them in their public acts, engraved
upon two tables of brass, one in the Roman, another in the
Greek language/ We have likewise in Josephus copies of
the decrees of Delos, Laodicea, Pergamos, Sardis, and other
cities in their proper forms : which were passed and re
gistered there in pursuance of the decrees of the Roman
senate: * Declaring', that out of their piety to God, and the
concern they have always had for the support of religion,
and in imitation of the Roman people who are benefactors
to all mankind, who had written to them that the Jews
should be permitted to perform the sacred rites of their
religion, observe their usual feasts, and hold their assem-
4 blies ; they ordain that the Jews who think fit so to do,

c Joseph. Ant. ubi supra. See Prideaux, Conn. Part. I. Book viii. year be
fore Chr. 293. p. 572. d About the year 60 before

Christ. c Sequitur auri ilia invidia Judaici. Cum aurum

Judaeorum nomine quotannis ex Italia, et ex omnibus vestris provinciis
Hierosolymam exportari soleret, Flaccus sanxit edicto, ne ex Asia exportari
liceret. Pro. Flacc. cap. 28. f Vid. Joseph. Ant. lib. xiv.

cap. 10. sect. 2.

The Treatment of the Jews by the Romans. 185

* both men and women, do keep the sabbaths and perform

* sacred rites according1 to the Jewish laws. — And if any

* man, whether magistrate or private person, do give them
' any let or hinderance herein, he shall be fined, and be
' reckoned debtor to the city.'s This is the substance of
the decree of the city of Halicarnassus, which the rest re
semble.

But the rites of the Jews being extremely different from
those of all others, and the people of most of the cities
being superior in number to the Jews, they were often
g'iving' them disturbance: and perhaps the Jews did some
times give them offences which they needed not to have
done. It was then the business of the Roman officers to do
them justice, according to the edicts of the senate and the
emperor.

And we have some instances of their receiving' relief from
the higher powers, when they had been injured, and it is
likely could not obtain satisfaction from the ordinary offi
cers ; either through their want of inclination, or of sufficient
power and authority to control the dispositions of the peo
ple where they resided.

When Agrippa the favourite of Augustus was in the
East with extraordinary power, as he was passing' through
Jonia with Herod the Greath in his company, the Jews
made complaints to him, that they were hindered in send
ing their tribute to the temple at Jerusalem ; that they
were obliged to serve in the army;1 and had many other
hardships put upon them inconsistent with the privileges
granted them by the Romans. k Agrippa gave them and
their adversaries a solemn hearing, and in court confirmed
to them their ancient privileges, and gave orders, ' that no

g ETTfl TO TTQOQ TO StWV £V<r£/3f£, KCtl OfflOV £V CtTTCLVTl KCtlpty did

, KaTaKO\fi9svTtg TQ dr)p,<t> TWV 'Pwjuaiwi/ -navTuv avOpWTrwv OVTI
Kai oig 7T£pi TTJQ I&Saiwv 0i\iat; Kai avufiaxiag TTpog Trjv TTO\IV eypa^tv,
avvTt\<t)vrai avroig al tig TOV Qeov UpOTroiiai Kai foprai at ti9iap,tvai Kai
efioKTai rjfjuv I&daiwv TUQ /3y\o/i£V8C ai^pag re KO.I yvvaiKaQ rare
2a/3/3ara aytiv Kai TO. Upa GWTtXtiv Kara TSQ lada'iicnQ vofisg' -- av ^e rig

t] ap\d)V rj iiwrTjg, oe r^> ?/jUtwj(iart vTTtvvvoQ e<rw, /cat
Ty TroXft. Ibid. sect. 23.

h About the 13th or 14th year before the nativity of our Lord, according
to the common account.

1 The Jews had been excused from serving as soldiers, because they could
not travel on the sabbath, nor have provisions agreeable to their laws and cus
toms. Vid. Joseph. Ant. lib. xiv. cap. 10. sect. 12.

Kai rag tTnjptiag tXiyov ag tTrrjosa^ovTO, /m;r£ vo/Jioig oiKtiotg ew/wvoi xPrlff~
Oai, — Kai Ti)v «£ 'lepoffoXv/ia %p/j/iarajv avaTi9tfJ,tvu)v atyaipoivTO, <rpariwj/
<cai \£ir«pyiwi; avay/ca^o/z£voi KOIVIOVHV,
Kara Tsg oiKfisg %yv vop&Q. Ant. lib. xvi. cap. 2. sect. 3.

186 Credibility of the Gospel History.

* one should molest them in the observation of their peculiar

* rites and customs.'1

Some time after this,m the Jews who lived in Asia and
in Cyrene in Libya, were oppressed and abused by the
people in those countries ; upon which the Jews sent an
embassy to Augustus himself for redress. Joseph us has
preserved a copy of the edict of the emperor upon this oc
casion : wherein, having first briefly mentioned the favours
showed to the Jews by Julius Ccesar, and their fidelity to
the Roman state, * He ordains by his own authority, with the
' advice of his council, that then Jews do practise their pe-

* culiar rites according to the law of their country, that their

* offerings be inviolable, that they be permitted to send
' them to Jerusalem, and to deliver them to those who are
' deputed to carry them to Jerusalem, that they be not
' obliged to give appearance in any court of justice on the
' sabbath, nor on the day before, being the preparation, after
6 the ninth hour. And if any man be taken stealing their
' sacred books or their sacred money, out of the places of
' their worship, or out of the chests in which they are kept,
' he shall be deemed sacrilegious, and his goods shall be

* confiscated to the public treasury of the Romans.'

And Philo assures us, that Augustus maintained through
out his reign the indulgence given to the Jews : ' that there
' was in his time a large quarter of the city of Rome on

* the other side of the Tiber inhabited by Jews ; that Au-

* gustus0 knew they had oratories there, and they resorted
4 to them, especially on the sabbaths, and that they also sent
' money instead of first-fruits by their own officers to Jeru-
' sal em.'

In the reign of Tiberius they were generally well used.
They were indeed banished out of Italy by an edict : but
it was for a misdemeanor committed by some villains of

1 Bf/3at8V avToig aveTrrjpfa^sg tv TOig ouctioig £iar£\£iv (.Oeffi. Ibid. sect. 5.

m Year before Christ 9. n E£o£t p.oi /cat TOJ ipy av^fBsXi^

fjiera 6p/cwjuocria£ yvw/iy drjfis 'Pw/iaiwv, Tag ladaisg xp/jaOat TOIQ iSioig Seafwig
Kara TOV irar^ov O.VTWV vojj,ov, ran tepa tivai tv aerwXta:, KM avaTTtfjiTrtaQai tig
'lepocroXvfjia, KCLI ciTrcfiidocrOai avra Toig cnrodoxtvsffiv 'lepocroAujuwj/, tyyvaq re
Hi] o^oXoytiv avTSQ ev craj3(3a,Giv, r\ ry irpo Tavrrjg TrapaaKtvy, OTTO wpaf tt>arr]Q'
eav de TIQ 0a>pa0y /cXeTrrwv Tag itpa<; fiifiXsQ awrwv, r\ ra tepa ^p7;//ara, CK re
<ra/3/3arf<8, £*c TS av^pwvoc, tivat avTov itpocryXov, icai TOV (3iov O.VT& £Vt%9r)vai
tig TO ^T/juoeriov TUV 'Pwjitaiwv. Ant. lib. xvi. cap. 6. sect. 2. vid. et Philon.
de Legat. ad Cai. p. 1035. E. 1026. A. B.

0 H7Ti<raro sv KUI Trpoaev^aQ £%ovrag KO.I OVVIOVTCLQ UQ UVTUQ icai juaXt^a TOIQ
itpaic; ifidofJiaiG ore ^^/ioffia TTJV TtctTpiov TtaifiivovTai QiXoffotyiav' rjTri^aTo /cat
^pjjjuara avvayayovTaq OTTO TWV a7rap%(i)v ifpa, /cat TrtjUTrovrae ttg
Cia T(DV Tag Svatag avaZovTtnv. Ibid. p. 1014. D,

The Treatment of the Jews by the Romans. 187

their nation at Rome.? The only hardship of it was, that a
great many innocent persons suffered beside the guilty.
On other occasions Tiberius showed them all the favour
they could desire, especially after the death of Sejanus ;
and is much applauded for it by Philo.^ It was in the
latter end of this reign that Vitellius president of Syria
performed an act of great complaisance to them. He was
marching with his forces against Aretas king of Petra, in
pursuance of orders he had received from Tiberius, and in
tended to pass through Judea. * But some of their chief

* men waited upon him and entreated him riot to lead his
' army through their country, because it was contrary to
' their laws that any images should be brought into it ;
' whereas there were a great many in his ensigns. And he
' hearkened to them, altered his intention, and ordered his
' troops another way.'r

During the reign of Caligula, they met with great hard
ships, especially at Alexandria. But the orders which
Caligula had given for the erecting a statue to himself as a
god, in the temple at Jerusalem, and for punishing the Jews
if they opposed it, did not take effect. By the kind and
prudent management of Petronius president of Syria, and
the intercessions of Agrippa the Great, delays were ob
tained, and Caligula died before the attempt was made.

Claudius the next succeeding emperor renewed to them
all their privileges. He directed in particular, by a decree,
that the Jews at Alexandria should be restored to all their
rights, which had been injuriously taken away from them*
in the reign of Caligula. He likewise published another
edict in favour of the Jews living in other parts, in which
he says : ' We approve that the Jews should in all parts of

* the world subject to us, practise the rites of their country

* without molestation ; extorting them likewise* to use this

P Jos. Ant. lib. xviii. cap. 4. sect. 5. * Ubi supra, p. 1015. B. C.

r lQp/j,r]iJ.tv(^ 5' avTcg diet TTJQ ladaiwv aytiv TOV ^parov, VTravTiaaavrtQ av~
dpt£ 01 TrpatToi TrapyTsvTO diet rrjv TT/IQ %wpct£ odov' « yap CLVTOLQ tivai TTCLTQIOV,

TTtplOpCfV tlKOVdQ (.IQ CtVTtJV 0£jOOjU£l>a£' 7ToXXa£ $' tlVCLl (njfiaiCtg tTriKtllLlVClQ' KCU

TruaQtiQ /isrtjSaXe re TTJCJ yvw/ijjf TO CTTI TOISTOIQ 7rpo{3n\tvffav, KCU Sia TS
jU£yaX« TreSiti Kt\tvffa£ %o)anv TO ^paTOTrtdov K. T. X. Antiq. lib. xviii. c. 6.
sect. 3. s BaXo/iat nrjdtv diet TIJV Ta'is Trapatypoavvrjv TWV

diKaiwv T({) Isdaiwv tQvti 7r«/oa7T£7rrwK£rai, QvXaaaeaQai de CIVTOIQ KOI TCI
iraoreoov ^tjcaiw/iara' K. X. Ibid. 1. xix. c. 5. sect. 2.

1 KaXwf sv £%£tv /cat ladaisg TSQ tv TTOVTL TQ iHfi fifiag Koap,'^ TO. Trarpia f.9r]
avtTriK(!i}\vT(i)£ 0yXa<T<T£iv, o«f KO.I avToiQ t]$i] vvv TrapayyfXXw fin Tavry ry
<j)i\av9pii)7rig, £7rt£iK£T£pov xprjaBai, KM fir] TO.Q TWV aXXaiv tQvwv ^nai^ai^ioviaq

t^,s9eVl^eiV, TKQ 1$18£ $E VOjJiHQ 0vXa(T(T£tV' TSTO /t8 TO dldTajfjia TSQ ap\OVTttQ
TWV TToXfUIV Kttl TitiV KO\<jt)VtHOV KO.I ^SVlKlTTKiiiV, TtoV tV Ty IraXt^t KCII Tl<JV tKTOQ,

re KOI

188 Credibility of the Gospel History.

* our humanity with moderation and sobriety, and not to
4 reproach the religions of other nations, but to observe their

* own laws. And I will that all magistrates of cities and
4 colonies and municipal places, both within and without
4 Italy, and all kings and princes, have this my edict tran-
4 scribed by their own officers, and that within thirty days

* it be fixed in some public place where it may be con-

* veniently read by all men.'

There was in the beginning of this reign, u a remarkable
piece of justice done the Jews at Doris in Syria, by Petro-
nius president of that province. The fact is this : Some
rash young- fellows of the place got in and set up a statue
of the emperor in the Jews' synagogue. Agrippa the Great
made complaints to Petronius concerning" this injury.
Whereupon Petronius issued a very sharp precept to the
magistrates of Doris. ' He terms v this action an offence not
4 against the Jews only, but also against the emperor : says,
4 It is agreeable to the law of nature, that every man should
4 be master of his places according to the decree of the em-
4 peror. I have, says he, given directions that they who
4 dared to do these things contrary to the edict of Augustus,
1 be delivered to the centurion Vitellius Proculus, that they
4 may be brought to me and answer for their behaviour,

* And I require the chief men in the magistracy to discover

* the guilty to the centurion, unless they are willing to have

* it thought, that this injustice has been done with their
6 consent ; and that they see to it that no sedition or tumult
6 happen upon this occasion ; which I perceive is what
6 some are aiming at. -- 1 do also require, that for the fu-
6 ture you seek no pretence for sedition or disturbance, but

* that all men worship [God] according to their own cus-
4 toms.'

The reader will perhaps indulge a short interruption
here in the course of this narration, in favour of an account

re f^fiv, aic ikarrov jy/ifpwv TpiaicovTa, bQev
Qyvat SVVO.TQ.I. Ib. sect. 3.

u A. D. 41, or 42. v Hapavop.svra^ 8/c

a\\a Kca fig TOV avTOKpaTOpa, - ry <f>vcrti ducais OVTOQ tva £Ka<rov TWV
TOTTMV Kvpievtiv Kara TO Kaiaapog eTriKpijjia' — TSQ p,ev Trapa TO ^iaray/ia TS
2t/3a^8 TOiavTct rjroXjUJj/coraf, £^>' w KCII avroi rjyavaKTf]ffav 01 doKsvT
i£,f%£iv, « Ty idiq, TrooaintGti -yeyevr](rOai XfyovTEQ, aXXa Ty TS TtKriQ
VTTO tKaTovTao^s ITpofcXa OviTtXXis £Kt\ev<ra itr ep.£ avaxQr]vai ruv
Htviov \oyov cnrodwaovTaQ, TOIQ df TrpWTOig «px«crt Trapaivw, u pr) f3s\ovTai
doiceiv /cara Trjv CIVTUV Trpoaioeaiv -yeytvifjcrO. i TO a^i/cTjjua, t7ri(Hti%ca T&Q aiTisg
TQ t/carovropx^, fia^ffuac <zaaea)Q ^ds /^a%j?c fw^rag a^op^rfv ytvtcQai, t]v
7r«p doKgai fjioi $ri)ptvec9ai diet TLOV TOI&TWV tpywv. — UQ Tt sv TO XOITTOV,
TrapayyeXXw, juTj^/iiav Trpotyaviv ^acrewG ju?2^£ raoaxrjc; fyjTtiv, aXXa (ica^sg TO.
tha Srprjvicevfiv tGt). Ant. lib. xix. c. 6. sect. 3.

The Treatment of the Jews by the Romans. 189

we have in the xvith of the Acts of the Apostles, of a trans
action that in some respects resembles this fact at Doris,
and may receive considerable light from it.

St. Paul was at Philippi in Macedonia : (it was now the
llth year ofw Claudius.) He there cured a " certain dam
sel possessed with a spirit of divination, which brought her
masters much gain by soothsaying. And when her masters
saw that the hope of their gains was gone, they caught Paul
and Silas, and drew them into the market-place unto the

rulers and the multitude rose up together against them,

and the magistrates rent off their clothes, and commanded
to beat them. And when they had laid many stripes upon
them, they east them into prison, charging the jailor to keep
them safely. And when it was day the magistrates sent the
sergeants, saying, let those men go. And the keeper of the

prison told this saying to Paul. — But Paul said, They

have beaten us openly uncondemned, being Romans, and
have cast us into prison, and now do they thrust us out
privily ? but let them come themselves and fetch us out. —
And when they heard that they were Romans — they came,
and besought them, and brought them out, and desired them
to depart out of the city," Acts xvi. 16 — 39.

Here we have an instance of a tumult raised by some self-
interested and designing men, the common people incensed
by their arguments, the magistrates drawn into an act of
injustice. Petronius seems to have suspected, that the disor
der at Doris had been committed with the connivance of
the rulers there. It is not at all unlikely that the magis
trates of cities and towns, who possibly were but a few
degrees above the common people, might sometimes ap
prove of these outrages and act a part in them : but the
presidents and proconsuls, men of a larger genius, who had
been educated at Rome and served offices there, who were
better acquainted with the Roman constitution, had a great
er charge, and were more immediately accountable to the
emperor and the senate for the observation of their edicts
and the peace of the provinces, never or very rarely en
tered into these measures ; but punished such disorderly
practices when they happened, and by fresh precepts en
deavoured to prevent them for the future.

However, this act of the magistrates at Philippi was a
sudden thing ; (" they have beaten us openly uncondemn
ed.") The order was given without a hearing ; and as
soon as it was light the next morning, they sent their offi
cers with directions that the prisoners should be released.
w Vid. Pears. Ann. Paul. p. 11. A. ch. 51.

190 Credibility of the Gospel History.

They soon repented of what they had done, and notwith
standing- the specious pretences and obnoxious charges
of the masters of this damsel, that Paul and Silas had
taught customs which were not lawful for them to observe—
they were sensible they had gone beyond their commission,
and were apprehensive of being called to an account, by a
higher authority to which they were subject. This order
of release was sent before they had heard that these men
were Romans, and whilst they knew no better than that they
were mere Jews, and defended by no other privileges than
those that belonged to all of that nation. And the history
Josephus has given us of the fact at Doris, and the conduct
of the president of Syria upon the occasion of it, may very
well render every part of this relation here highly proba
ble. When these magistrates knew that Paul and Silas
were Romans, their concern was still increased ; and their
own interest obliged them to all the farther condescensions
which Paul demanded.

But to return to the course of the narration.

There was another signal instance of the moderation of
Claudius to the Jews, which may not be passed by. But
before I produce it, I must give some short history of the
vestment of the high priest,x which I shall do in almost the
very words of Josephus : who says, that Herod the Great
and his son Archelaus had this sacred vestment in their keep
ing, and lodged it in the castle Antonia ; and that the Ro
man procurators who succeeded to them in the government
of Judea finding it there, kept the possession of it till Vitel-
lius president of Syria, in the latter end of Tiberius's reign,
gave it to the Jews to keep it themselves. The high priest
wore this garment four times only in the year ; at the three
great feasts and on the day of the fast. It was delivered to
him seven days before these seasons, and was first purified
before he put it on. The next day after these solemnities
were over, it was returned to the officer of the chest. This
was the method whilst it was kept by Herod and the Ro
man governors. But, as was just hinted, Vitellius gave it
to the Jews, that they might lock it up in a chest of their
own in the temple, and take it out thence for their use with
out asking particular leave.y

But when Cuspius Fadus2 was procurator of Judea, he
received orders from the emperor to take * the holy gar-
6 ment which the high priest alone wears into his own pos-
' session.' Josephus does immediately before this mention a

x TTJV ToXjjv re apxtepfwc- J Joseph. Ant. lib. xviii. cap. 5.

sect. 3. z A. D. 45.

The Treatment of the Jews by the Romans. 191

disturbance which the Jews of Paraea gave to some of their
neighbours. He does not say that irregular proceeding
had brought upon them this disagreeable message : though
it was highly probable, that it was owing to their irregular
conduct in that or some other affair.

But however that be, when Fad us had received these or
ders, he called together * the high priestsa and chief men
' of Jerusalem, acquainted them with the emperor's orders,

* and commanded them " to deliver to him the vestment of
' the high priest, that it might be lodged in the castle of

* Antonia, as formerly." They did not dare absolutely to

* refuse : but they earnestly entreated Fad us, and Cassius
' Longinus president of Syria, who was then likewise at

* Jerusalem,' (and who was indeed come thither with forces
on purpose to prevent the sedition which it was appre
hended the delivery and execution of this order might
occasion ;) ' that they would give them leave to send am-
4 bassadors to the emperor, and that they would wait till
' fresh directions came from Rome ; with which request
'• they complied.' When the Jewish ambassadors came to
Rome, they found there Agrippa the younger, who seconded
their petition. The emperor granted their petition, and
sent by them a letter directed to the magistrates of Jerusa
lem, the senate, people, and the whole nation of the Jews :
in which he says, ' Agrippa — having introduced to me your

ambassadors, who thankfully acknowledge the benefits I
have conferred upon your nation, and earnestly beseeched
me, that you might have the sacred vestment and the
crown in your own keeping, according as it had been al
lowed by the excellent and my well beloved Vitellius, I
have granted that so it should be. I have ratified this
sentence from that principle of piety with which I am
possessed, and because I will that all men worship [God]

* according to the laws of their country.'5

This argument will be imperfect if I do not show some
instance of this equity to the Jews in the reign of Nero.
The only fact I shall mention here is this. It happened in
the time that Festus was governor of Judea,c who was the
person who sent Paul to Rome. Agrippa the younger

g or) teat TOTE /Lt£ra7rijMi//ajuf i/of Tsg ap%i€png, KO.I Tag Trpiorsg 'l£po<ro\u-
KctTa TTJV neXevviv r« avro/cporropoe, Trapjjvtffev aurotf rov TroSrjpr} x1™'
va, KCCI Tr]v ttpav <zo\rjv r)v <f>optiv [IOVOQ b ap-%uptvQ lOog €%£t, tig TTJV Avrw-
vtav, rjTTtp £<ri 0pspiov, KaraBetrOai, <c£«ro/i£V7jv IITTO ry 'Pw/zatwv tZzau}., KaOa
$r) KM TTportpov TJV. Ant. lib. xx. c. ]. sect. 1.

2vy/cctT£0f^t»jj; CE 7*y yvwuy Tavry^ TrpioTov diet TO fuavTa tVGtQtQ) KCII TO
(3&\eff9ai itca^ag Kara ra Trarpia $pr)<TKtvtiV ib. sect. 2.
c A. D. 60. Basnage Ann. P. E. A. 60. n. 3.

192 Credibility of the Gospel History.

raised the buildings of the house in which he resided whert
he was at Jerusalem, and which had been the palace of the
Asmonoean family : by which he had not only a fine pros
pect of the city, but likewise overlooked the inner court of
the temple. ' When the people of Jerusalem saw what he

* had done they were greatly incensed : for neither do our
' customs nor our laws permit, that any beside the priests

* should see what was done in the temple. They therefore
' raised a high wall at the extremity of the west side of the
' inner court of the temple, d whereby they obstructed not
' only the king's view [sc. Agrippa's] out of his dining-
' room, but also the view from the western portico without
' the court, where the Romans used to keep guard on the
' festival days. Agrippa was exceedingly provoked at it,
' and Festus the governor yet more ; and commanded

* them to pull the wall down again. But they desired he
4 would permit them to send ambassadors to Nero. Festus

* giving" them leave, they deputed to Nero ten of their chief
' men, and Ishmael the high priest, and Helchias the keeper
' of the sacred treasury. Nero having given them an audi-
' ence, not only forgave what they had done, but allowed
' that the building should remain.'6

This must be acknowledged to be a remarkable instance
of goodness. It shows a great backwardness in Nero, or
those who then governed him, to break in upon their reli
gion, or any thing they esteemed sacred. This palace of
Agrippa and the Roman fort stood either directly west, or
at least very near west of the temple. The entrance into
the temple was at the east end, so that .they had no view
from these buildings into the temple itself; only the high
ground they stood upon and the loftiness of the fabric, gave
a view into the inner court where the sacrifices were per
formed. And it being, as it seems, inconsistent with their
law, or at least with their customs, that their sacred acts
should be overlooked by any but the priests, the building*
that obstructed the view was permitted by the emperor to
remain. I have already taken notice of the permission the
Roman government had given the Jews, to kill any Gen
tile, though a Roman, who entered beyond the bounds pre
scribed to those who were not Jews, and need not repeat it
here.

f VJTIQ t\v sv Ti
Trpof dvaiv. e Nepwv fe diaKsaag avrwv, a

flOVOV GVVlJVb) TTfpl T8 7Tpa%9eVTO£, aAXflt K0tl <TVV£X(l)P'nfftv OVTUQ fttV TTf]V

ry yvvaiKi HoTnnjiq., Stoffefirjg yap qv, i/Trcp rwv I&Saiuv
Ant. lib. xx. c. 8. sect. 11.

The Treatment of the Jews by the Romans. 193

V. I have now brought down my account of the treat
ment which the Roman commonwealth and empire gave to
the several religions which obtained in the countries under
their dominion, and particularly to the Jewish religion
during the period I am concerned with. There are in this
short view several acts of goodness and justice done to the
Jews by presidents of provinces, besides the edicts and de
clarations of the senate or the emperors. But as the parti
culars relating to this subject mentioned in the Acts of the
Apostles, are chiefly instances of the conduct of governors
of provinces, or the officers next in authority under them,
it will not be amiss to add two or three more testimonies
relating to the behaviour of persons of those characters.

' There happened likewise, says Josephus, another dis-

* turbance at Caesarea;f the Jews and Syrians, who lived

* there promiscuously, running both into a seditious beha-
' viour. For they would have it that the city was theirs,
' because the founder of it, Herod their king, was a Jew.

* These allowed that the founder indeed was a Jew, but

* they asserted, that notwithstanding that the city was the

* Greeks'. For if it had been given to the Jews, there

* would have been no right of erecting statues and temples

* in it. This point they disputed one with another till they

* came to blows, and the more resolute of each party had

* daily skirmishes together. For the elders of the Jews
' were not able to keep the seditious part of their own peo-
' pie in order ; and the Greeks were ashamed to yield to

* the Jews. These had the advantage in point of wealth

* and strength of body ; but the Greeks had the encourage-
' ment and assistance of the soldiers. For the greatest part
' of the Roman garrison there consisting of men raised in

* Syria, they were ready to join with the Greeks as being
' their countrymen.^ The officers however did their best
' to suppress these disturbances, and from time to time

* seized the most factious of each side, and punished them
' with scourging or imprisonment. But yet the sufferings
' of those who were apprehended did very little restrain or
' terrify the rest, for they were the rather the more provoked

* to be seditious. At length the Jews having had the bet-

* ter in a combat, Felix coming into the market-place re-
' quired them to withdraw peaceably, threatening them se-

* verely if they did not. They not obeying him, he ordered

f A. D. 56. vid. Basnage, Ann. Polit. Ecc.

V rapa.%r)v, /cat TU
aft <n;\Xa/z/3avoi>r££ £Ko\aZ,ov ^ia?i£i Krai StffftoiQ' Caeterum

militum praefectis curse erat tumultum coraprimere, &c. Hudson. Vers.
VOL. I. O

194 Credibility of the Gospel History.

4 his soldiers in amongst them : many were killed upon the

* spot, whose goods1' happened also to be plundered after-

* wards. The sedition still continuing* there, he having* se-

* lected several of the chief men of each body sent them to
' Nero, that they might both lay their several pretensions

* before him/1

This is the account which Josephus gives of this affair in
the Jewish War. In his Antiquities14 a part of this story
stands thus : * At length they came to throwing of stones
' at each other : and many were wounded on both sides.
' The Jews however had the victory. Felix then perceiving
4 this contention between them like to become a sort of open
' war, came out to them and desired the Jews to give over.
' They not obeying him, he gave his soldiers orders to take
' their arms and fall upon them ; and he slew a great many,
' took more prisoners, and gave his soldiers leave to plun-

* der some houses which were full of treasure. But the
' more moderate and the most eminent men of the Jews,
' being* concerned for themselves as well as for their people,

* entreated Felix to order his soldiers to retreat and to spare
4 the rest, and also to forgive what had passed. And Felix
' granted their requests.'

These passages of Josephus deserve the more to be re
spected, because they assure us of the good measures taken
by Felix, a person not much celebrated for the justice of
his administration in other matters, and by the chief officers
under him, where they had concerns with men of different
religions : and that they did not attempt to subvert the
rights of either side, but only endeavoured to keep the
peace among them, as far as they were able, at a season in
which the Jews were extremely resolute and tumultuous.
And St. Paul received some civilities from Felix, as well as
from Lysias, one of his principal officers.

Josephus gives an account of a sedition raised by the
Jews at Alexandria, about the time1 the war broke out in
Judea. Having mentioned the privileges granted to the
Jews there by Alexander the Great, he says ; * And when

h Avcupti <TV^V8£, u)v diapTrayrival ffwifiij cat THQ saiag.

1 De Bell. lib. ii. cap. 13. fin. k 4>;?Xi£

<j)tXov(.iKiav tv TroXfjLia rp07T^» yfi'o/i£V?7V, TrpOTTijftricraG, TravtaO
TrapfKctXfi' p.T] TruQofjuvoiQ de TSQ <rjOcmwra£ bir\t<ra£ C7Trt0o;cri,
avTO)v avaXf, 7rX«8f de £wj/rag tXajSsv, oiKiag dr] Tivag TUV ev ry rroXei TroXXwv
•xavv xpfj/iarwv yf/tstrae &ap7ra£«v ttyrjicev TOIQ <rjoana*r<«£ ' 01 fo rwv ladaHDV
tTrwtKETfpot, fcai TTpaxovrtQ Kara TTJV a^taxrtv, deicravres TTfpi iavTMV, TraptKa-
\sv TQV <&T]\iKa TSQ <rpaTio»raf avaKaXsiaOai ry (taXTTtyyi, Kai fyeidtcrQai TO Xot-
TTOV O.VTWV, fiavai re jnfravotav CTTI TOIQ 7T£7rpay^fj'otc* Kai
Lib. xx. cap. 6. sect. 7. l A. D. 66.

The Treatment of the Jews by the Romans. 195

* the Romans became masters of Egypt, neither Csesar the
4 first (of that name) nor any of his successors would suffer

* the honours conferred upon them [the Jews] by Alexan-

* der to be diminished. There were however continual con-

* tentions between them and the Greeks. Andm thoicgh the
1 Presidents daily punished many on both sides, yet animosi-

* ties increased. And as there were disturbances at that

* time in other places, so especially at Alexandria. The
4 Alexandrians having- called an assembly to consider of the

* embassy they were about to send to Nero, a great many of
4 the Jews came into the amphitheatre, and mixed them-
4 selves with the Greeks. When some of the Alexandrians

* perceived them, they cried out, that there were enemies come
4 in amongst them, to be spies upon their debates, and

* immediately laid hands upon several of them. Some

* others perished as they were getting out : and three in

* particular, which had gotten out, were taken and brought
4 back. These they threatened to burn alive. Hereupon,

* all the Jews in general came to the rescue of these men.

* They began with throwing stones at the Greeks : then
4 getting lighted torches they surrounded the amphitheatre,
4 and threatened to set fire to it, and burn all the people
4 there to a man. So they would have done, if Tiberius

* Alexander, prefect of the city, had not prevented them.
4 Though indeed he did not begin immediately with liostili-
4 ties ; but sending some persons of distinction to them,

* advised them to be peaceable, and not to draw upon them-

* selves the Roman garrison. But these seditious people

* ridiculed the advice, and reviled Tiberius.'

The president happened to have with him five thousand
soldiers, who had halted at Alexandria, in their march
from Libya into Judea, beside the two legions, the usual
garrison there.

Tiberius therefore ordered his soldiers to their arms.
The Jews made a long defence, but when once they were
routed, there was a dreadful slaughter of them : * fifty
thousand were killed. Nor would any of them have been
left alive, if they had not submitted, and cried out for
mercy. Alexander then taking compassion on them, or
dered his soldiers to desist. They being always trained
to obedience, gave over the slaughter at the very first
word of command. But the Alexandrians, being filled with
4 inveterate hatred, were difficultly drawn off, and could

m Kat rwv r/yt/ioywv ITO\\SQ bffrjfjitpai Trap' a^oiv KoXaZovrutv, r}
fiaXXov TTapio^vvero.

o2

196 Credibility of the Gospel History.

' scarce be restrained from insulting and abusing the dead

* bodies.'0

This is indeed a long story. But the passage containing
not only a character of the usual conduct of the presidents
of Egypt, but giving us likewise an instance of a very

freat moderation, I was unwilling to abridge it very much,
term it moderation ; for so it seems to me, for the governor
to send amicable advice to so tumultuous a body of people,
and warn them of the consequences of obstinacy, instead of
coming upon them with his forces, especially when he was
so well provided. And it was very honourable to accept
the first tenders of submission.

I shall give but one passage more relating to this matter.
' They [[the Jews] received likewise,' says Josephus, ' con-
' sideraUIe honours from the king's of Asia, because they had
6 served them in their wars. Seleucus Nicator gave them
' the privileges of citizens in Antioch, the metropolis of his
' kingdom, which privilege they enjoy to this day. I need
' give no other proof of it than this, that the Jews refusing*

* to use oil prepared by other people, the Gyrnnasiarchs0
' gave them a certain prescribed piece of money instead of

* the oil which should be allowed1* them. And when the

;eople of Antioch, in the time of the late war, would have
roke in upon this custom, Mucianus, then president of

* Syria, obliged them to continue it. And afterwards, when

* Vespasian and his son Titus were become lords of the
' whole world, and the Alexandrians and Antiochians de-
' sired that the rights of citizenship might be taken from the
' Jews, they would not comply with their desire. From

* whence any may perceive the equity and true greatness 1
4 of the Romans, and especially of Vespasian and Titus; who
6 though they had undergone many fatigues in the war with

* the Jews, and had been very much offended with them,
' that they would not submit themselves to them, but

* fought against them to the last as long as they were
' able, yet they did not take away from them the fore-

* mentioned citizenship : but so moderated and resisted their
' own former displeasure against the Jews and the entreaties

* of the Alexandrians and Antiochians, people of the great-

* est consequence, as not to abrogate any part of the ancient

* privileges given to the Jews, out of favour for those cities,

n De Bell. lib. ii. cap. 18. sect. 7, 8.

0 Officers that governed the places of exercise in the Greek cities.
p TejeyitTjptov fie TBQ latfaisf, ^ (3s\onevsg aXXotyvXy eXcciy %p?7<ra<70ai, Xap-
rt ?rapa ra>v yv/ivatriap^wv £i£ eXcua Tifjirjv apyvpiov.

!"

bi

The Treatment of the Jews by the Romans. 197

* or out of resentment toward those wicked people whom
' they had vanquished ; saying*, that they who had taken up

* arms against them, and had been subdued by them, had
' been sufficiently punished ;.and that it would be unjust
4 to deprive those of their privileges, who had committed

* no fault.' r Here is one remarkable instance of Jewish
niceness, and more than one example of Roman generosity.

These are authentic testimonies in behalf of the equity of
the Roman government in general, and of the impartial
administration of justice by the Roman presidents toward
all the people of their provinces, how much soever they
differed from each other in matters of religion.

It is undoubted, that many of these presidents were
guilty of extortion, and other acts of injustice, and endea
voured to enrich themselves in the provinces. But there
seems not to have been any one thing', which the Romans were
more concerned to preserve inviolable, than the religion of
all the people whom they conquered ; judging, it is likely,
that there is nothing gives a people so universal a disgust, as
injuries done to their religion ; and that therefore, the only
way to preserve peace throughout their empire, was to pro
tect all men every where in the practice of their own reli
gious8 rites.

VI. I imagine, however, that the reader will be apt to
recollect here the several violations of things sacred, which
I have related to have been committed by Verres in Sicily ;
and he may be inclined to think, that such instances do very
much weaken this argument.

But then it ought to be remembered likewise, that these
actions were very much cried out upon, and Verres was
called to an account for them. Besides, there is no reason to
think there were many such as Verres, whose administration
was infamous to a1 proverb. It ought also to be considered,
that Verres was prsetor of Sicily under the commonwealth,
at a time when the courts of judicature at Rome, before
whom complaints from the provinces were brought, were
extremely corrupt ; when justice was administered very
slowly, and oftentimes not obtained at all. There are in
Cicero himself many acknowledgments of the bad state of

r Jos. Ant. lib. xii. cap. 3. init. 8 Quid ? hem ! mediocrine

tandem dolore eos affectos esse arbitramini ? non ita est, judices : primum
quod omnes religione moventur : et deos patrios, quos a majoribusacceperunt,
colendos sibi diligenter et retinendos esse arbitrantur. Cic. in Verr. lib. iv. c.
59. l Eodem tempore Metellus, Siciliae praetor, cum fcedissima

ilia C. Verris praetura Sicilian! adflictam invenisset, &c. P. Oros. Hist. 1. vi. q.
3. p. 376. Ed. Havercamp.

198 Credibility of the Gospel History.

affairs at that time in this respect." And I believe, the
provinces were much happier under the emperors for a
considerable time below the period of the evangelical
history, than they had been for some time under the com
monwealth.

There was a very signal piece of justice done the Jews
by the emperor Claudius. It lies so much in the very
midst of our history, that it is not easy to pass it by. In the
time that Cumanus, predecessor to Felix, was procurator of
Judea, there happened a difference between the Jews and
Samaritans ; the rise of which was an assault made by the
Samaritans upon some Galileans as they were going up to
Jerusalem. Cumanus not doing his duty, complaints were
made to Urnmidius Quadratus, president of Syria. The
Jews affirmed that Cumanus had been bribed by the Sama
ritans, and each side made many complaints. Quadratus
came into Judea, punished some himself, sent several of the
chief Jews and Samaritans, as well as Cumanus, and Celer
the tribune, to Rome, to give an account of themselves to
Claudius : who, having heard both sides, pronounced sen
tence, banished v Cumanus, and ordered that Celer the
tribune should be had back to Jerusalem, and after he had
been led through the city, be beheaded.

I cannot be certain that Celer had the same post at Jeru
salem under Cumanus, that Lysias had under Felix, though
Josephus gives Celer the same title that St. Luke does
Lysias. Nor would I be understood to insinuate, that this
punishment of Celer was the chief cause of Lysias's good
conduct. He appears to me so just, punctual, and prudent
in every part of his behaviour, during that short time that
St. Paul was at Jerusalem, after he was taken into custody,
that I take it for granted he was actuated by some better
principle. But though this favourable supposition be a
piece of justice to Lysias, yet I make no doubt, but that
this execution of Celer was a restraint upon some people ;
and that St. Paul and many others in Judea, and possibly
in other provinces likewise, had some benefit by it.

I have, I hope, in this chapter and other parts of this
work, given passages enough to enable every reader to
judge for himself in this point ; and whereby he may be

u Spoliasti Siculos. Solent enim inulti esse in injuriis suis provinciales.
Cic. in Verr. lib. iii. cap. 41. Lugent omnes provincise : queruntur omnes
liberi populi : regna denique jam omnia de nostris cupiditatibus et injuriis ex-
postulant. Ibid. cap. 89. v Ty Kvpavy Qvyrjv £7re/3a\f,

KcXcpa ds TOV ^tXtap^ov tKeXtvatv ayovrag ttQ TO. 'I(poffo\vjj,at TTCLVTWV opwvTwv

tin ri\v TTO\IV iraffav (Tvpavrag, ovra>£ aTTOKTtivcti. Antiq. lib. XX. C. 5. sect.
3. vid. etdeB. p. 1074. 20.

The Treatment of the Jews by the Romans, 199

assured the Jews enjoyed their religion in Judea and out of
it, without any very considerable molestations. They had,
particularly in Judea, their high priests, frequented Jeru
salem at their great feasts ; images and other abominations
were kept out of the country, or if they were brought in
they were soon carried back again.

Nay, there appear in the accounts I have given, several
positive proofs of an equal administration of justice in
divers parts, where injuries were offered ; and more might
be given. A Roman soldier in Judea having rent and
burnt a book of the laws of Moses, the forementioned
Cumanus, at the request of the Jews, had him putw to
death. I believe that most will allow, a capital punishment
of a crime not particularly specified, it is likely, in any law
whatsoever, to be an act of complete justice at least.

VII. It will be needful, however, in order fully to clear
up this matter, to subjoin two or three remarks.

1. It must be owned, that according to the Roman laws
no man might introduce any new gods, or worship publicly
or privately any strange or foreign gods not allowed *)f by
public authority. x

2. But yet the disciples of Jesus Christ were under the
protection of the Roman laws, since the God whom they
worshipped, and whose worship they recommended, was
the God of the heavens and the earth, the same God whom
the Jews worshipped, the worship of whom was allowed of
all over the Roman empire, and established by special edicts
and decrees in most, perhaps in all the places in which we
meet with St. Paul in his travels.

It is evident that St. Paul makes his defence before Felix
in Judea upon this foot. " They neither found me in the
temple disputing with any man. — But this I confess to thee,
that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the
God of my fathers" Acts xxiv. 14. They call this way a
sect, a new sect ; grant it to be so : but in this way I wor
ship the God of rny fathers, the same God which they do,
and believe all things which are written in the law and the
prophets as firmly as any Jew whatever : nor do I say any
thing inconsistent with them, or which I cannot support by
them : and therefore I am entitled to protection equally
with them, since I have not attempted nor advised any dis
turbance or insurrection. This therefore was a very just

w Anriq. lib. xx. cap. 4. sect. 4. de B. J. lib. ii. cap. 12. sect. 2.
x Separatira nemo habessit decs neve novos : Sed ne advenas, nisi publice
adscitos, privatim colunto. Cic. de legib. lib. ii. cap. 8. init.

200 Credibility of the Gospel History.

and proper defence before Felix, a heathen magistrate, and
it was completely valid.

And the Roman magistrates out of Judea, and the heathen
people every where, considered St. Paul and his companions
as Jews. It was so evidently in Achaia. The Jews brought
Paul before the judgment-seat, " saying, This fellow per-
suadeth men to worship God contrary to the law," Acts
xviii. 13. But Gallio supposed that Paul had as good a
right to protection as themselves, and that the differences
between Paul and them were no other than such as might
happen between men of one and the same religion ; and that
the only reason why Paul was brought before him, was the
envy, malice, and bigotry of some of the leading men among
the Jews of his province. " If it be a question of words
and names," says he, " and of your law, look ye to it, for I
will be no judge of such matters." ver. 15.

From whence I think it appears, that Gallio was not so
ignorant of the case brought before him as some may be
ready to imagine. If, says he, the matter in dispute y be a
" word," some particular opinion2 and doctrine, which you
say Paul preaches ; or of names whether Jesus may be
called the Christ; (or perhaps he means of matters about
which the difference is so small that it is rather a contro
versy about names than things ;) or " of your law," whether
it obliges all men to be circumcised who go over to the
worship of your God, I will be no judge between you con
cerning such matters.

If the sense I here give of these words, and particularly
" of your law," be right, it is an evidence that Gallio knew
very well that Paul had converted heathens to his sentiments,
and yet he took no offence at it : only he was resolved not
to pass any judicial sentence upon these matters. And in
deed I think it plain from St. Luke's account, that Gallio
had heard the Jews tell their story out. But when they
had done, he had more honour and good sense than to oblige
Paul to make an apology for his principles in court, under
the character of a criminal or accused person.

Nor is it at all strange, that Gallio did not resent St.
Paul's converting men from heathenism to the worship of
the true God ; since the Jews had done the same thing in
many parts of the Roman empire without offence, though
not with so good success as St. Paul.

Xoy«. z 'Saddaicaioig de rag ^v%«c 6 AOFOS

ovva<f>avi&t TOIQ ffupaai. Joseph, p. 793. 20. tig oXiyyf re avSpctQ ovTOf 6
AOrOS aiKtTo. Ibid. 23.

The Treatment of the Christians and Jews by the Romans. 201

But to proceed. It is apparent that the heathen people
also considered the apostle and those with him as Jews.

It is with this speech that the masters of the damsel at
Philippi come before the magistrates, when they brought
along with them Paul and Silas : " These men, being Jews,
do exceedingly trouble our city," Acts xvi. 20. And
though the magistrates were so far heated and misled by
these men, as to order Paul and Silas to be beaten and im
prisoned ; yet they had no sooner reflected upon what they
had done, but they were sensible that they themselves had
broken the laws, in punishing men that were Jews for
spreading their principles, and that they were liable to be
reprimanded for it.

The uproar at Ephesus affords a remarkable proof of the
same thing. The silversmiths that made shrines for Diana
began a popular speech there, Acts xix. 26 — 34, " Ye
see," say they, " and hear, that not alone at Ephesus, but
almost throughout all Asia, this Paul hath persuaded and
turned away much people, saying, that they be no Gods
which are made with hands." (All the Jews said the same
thing.) " And the whole city was filled with confusion. —
And they rushed with one accord into the theatre. — And
they drew Alexander out of the multitude, the Jews put
ting him forward. And Alexander beckoned with the
hand, and would have made his defence unto the people.
But when they knew that he was a Jew, all with one voice
about the space of two hours cried out, Great is Diana of
the Ephesians."

Alexander was put forward by the Jews, and undoubt
edly intended to have declaimed against Paul ; but so soon
as the people knew that he was a Jew, instead of hearken
ing to him, they were thrown into a fresh ferment.

I think I need not add that Festus so understood the
matter likewise, his words having been already more than
once produced, in which he tells Agrippa, that when Paul's
accusers stood up they had only " certain questions against
him of their own superstition" Acts xxv. 18, 19.

3. It ought to be observed, that the first followers of Jesus
did every where observe an admirable decorum in all their
words and actions. It may perhaps be inconceivable by
some, how they should be able thus to behave every where,
animated as they were with a warm as well as just zeal for
the truths of the Christian doctrine, and a thorough dislike
of all the abominations and absurdities of the heathen wor
ship. ' But yet it is certain they did so. We have uncon-
tested evidence of it.

202 Credibility of the Gospel History.

St. Luke assures us, Acts xvii. 16, that when St. Paul was
at Athens, " his spirit was stirred in him, when he saw the
city was wholly given to idolatry/' But when he comes to
make his speech in the Areopagus, his temper and address
are equal to his argument, which certainly can never be
exceeded. According- to our translation indeed there is
harshness in the very introduction : " Ye men of Athens, I
perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious :" whereas
the original a is peculiarly soft, if any censure was intended :
butb I apprehend that St. Paul tells them, he perceived
they were " in all things very devout." This would give
no offence at Athens. It was their peculiar0 character, the
encomium which they were fond of above any other.

a Si lenitatem Pauli spectemus - confirmat hoc imprimis a
traducta vox : cui quidem inest mulla suavitate permista castigatio. Sam.
Drake, S. T. P. de Ara Ignoto Deo Sacra. Cantab. 1724. p. 12.

b Kara iravTa. wg deiffidaifjiovt^epag vfiag Sewpa). The word dtiaifiaifjiovia is
often used in a bad sense, but it has also a good, or at least an innocent mean
ing. Festus tells Agrippa, that Paul's accusers had nothing against him " but
certain questions Trtoi rrjq iStag dticnSaiiJioviag, of their own superstition," Acts
xxv. 19. It should be rendered religion. It cannot be supposed that Festus
would speak contemptuously to Agrippa of the Jewish, that is, Agrippa's own
religion : when Agrippa was come to Csesarea with his sister Bernice to salute
him. It is also apparent, that Festus does show Agrippa a great deal of re
spect. Josephus says, that Manasses having repented of his idolatry and
other sins against God, he resolved for the future iraey %p7j<r0ai Treoi avrov
fcividaiftoviy, to be constant in the worship of him. Jos. p. 437. 20. Clau
dius, in his edict published in favour of the Jews, exhorts them ^ rag TWV
aXXwv dtiaiBaifiomag t&Otvt&iv, id. p. 866. 18. not to set at nought, or to re
vile the religions of other nations. Vid. eund. p. 632. 39. p. 1066. 31. It
appears also from what follows, that St. Paul had not blamed the Athenians.
Having mentioned the inscription of the altar, " To the unknown God j" he
goes on, ov sv ajvoavTfg evatfBttre ; " whom therefore ye ignorantly worship,
him declare I unto you." The verb here used for worship is always ex
pressive of a laudable piety. See examples in Grotius upon the place. The
harsh sense of the word AfKri^ai^ovia, is inconsistent with the whole design of
St. Paul's argument. If he had told them at first that they were superstitious,
he encourages them in it, and endeavours to make them more so. If St.
Paul's instance had been that of some false god, there had been some reason
to put the harsh sense upon the word in this place. But now there is no rea
son at all for it; since the inscription he produces directly intended, or at least
comprehended under it, the true God, whom St. Paul preached. I think
therefore that St. Paul says : " I perceive that ye are in all things very devout.
For as I passed along, and observed the objects of your worship, I found also
an altar with this inscription : To the unknown God. Whom therefore ye
worship without knowing him, him do I declare unto you."

c Et yap rt aXXo Tijg A.Qiivai(t)v TroXiWf, /cat r«r' tv Trpwroig t<ziv tyKW/iioj/,
TO TTtpi rravrog Trpay/xarof, /cat tv iravn /catpy, rotg Seoig iiriGQat, KCII p,r]Sev
aviv itavTiKrjg /cat %p»j(7/jwv cTrtrtXetv. Dionys. Hal. de Thucyd. Judic. sect.
40. vid. et Sophoc. CEd. Col. v. 1000. et seq. It was customary for eminent
strangers who spoke in public at Athens, to give them in their first discourse
some commendation from the wisdom of their laws and institutions, or some

The Treatment of the Christians and Jews by the Romans. 203

It is true, St. Luke says, that at the conclusion, ver. 32,
" when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some
mocked : and others said. We will hear thee again of this
matter.'* It is very possible, some might be surprised at
the novelty of St. Paul's principles, and be inclined to make
themselves merry with them. But I do not perceive by St.
Luke that they were ; I think, there could not be any ex
ceptions made to the propriety or decency of any of his
expressions.

St. Luke has not recorded any of the discourses made by
St. Paul, or those who were with him at Ephesus. But
however, we have authentic evidence of the innocence of
their words and actions there also. " Ye have brought
hither," says the town-clerk to the people of Ephesus, Acts
xix. 37, " these men, which are neither robbers of churches,
nor yet blasphemers of your g'oddess." He says this of
Gaius and Aristarchus, men of Macedonia, Paul's com
panions in his travels. So that this temper and prudence
were not peculiar to St. Paul, but common to him with his
companions. What the town-clerk says here may be relied
on : he is speaking to the enraged multitude : if there had
been any blasphemies uttered by these men he had made
them his own.

The conduct or express declarations of Felix, Festus,

other topic. St. Paul had good reason not to be defective in this point upon
so nice an occasion. He could very truly say they were a devout people. It
was extremely to his purpose, and they would be much pleased to hear it
from him. 'H fiev dr) dia\t%i£ eiraivoi rjaav TS a<r£OJC, icai aTroXoyiai Trpog TSQ
AQj]vaisQ, UTTfp TS fii] Trporfpov Trpog avrng a<t>i\9ai. Philost. Vit. Alex. Sophist,
sect. 3. AQrfvaioiQ (lev yap fTrideiKv^ievog avTOff^t^iag Xoyyg, ore Kai Trpwroj/
AQqvaZt a^t/ctro, SK eQ tyKu/jiiov KUTS^rjffev kavrov rs a<rew£, roasrwv ovrwv,
a TIQ i/TTtp AQrjvanav eiiroi' id. Vit. Polem. sect. 4. It was therefore a singu
larity in Polemon, a most proud man, that in his discourse at Athens, at his
first visit, he said nothing in their praise. There is another like example par
ticularly observed in Adrian the sophist. M£TO£ Se OVTOJ Trapprjmag e-rn rov
Spovov TraprjXQe, rov AOqvyGiv, wg KO.I Trpooijuiov ol yevtcrQai rrjq Trpof avrag
5toXt?£Wf, /jirj TTJV tKtivwv oofyiav, aXAa TTJV tavra. id. vit. Adrian, sect. 2.
Grotius understood St. Paul to speak here of the Athenians in the way of
commendation, as I do.

I take the liberty to add, in this third edition, a passage or two from Mr.
Warburton, confirming the interpretation I have given of this text. His
words are these -. « Athens was a city the most devoted to religion of any
' upon the face of the earth. On this account their poet Sophocles calls it
' the sacred building of the gods, AOrjvuv TWV Sfofyi^rwj/.' Warburton's
Divine Legation of Moses. B. i. Sect. 4. p. 136. 2d. Edit. Again : ' This
' was the reason why St. Paul, who was regarded as the bringer in of foreign
' gods, was had up to the court of Areopagus ; not as a criminal, but rather as
* a public benefactor, who had a new worship to propose to a people, " above
' all others religious, wg foi<n&u/zov£T£poi." ' Id. ib. Book ii. Sect. 6. p. 296.

204 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Agrippa, are testimonies to the like unblamable and inof
fensive behaviour of St. Paul at Jerusalem.

I do not say, that according to laws since enacted in
some states, the apostles would not have been judged of
fenders. But it ought to be remembered, that the Romans
did for a long time as far surpass many modern governments
in the justice and equity of their political maxims, as in the
grandeur of their empire : nor had they yet renounced or
departed from them.

Had there been any affront offered by Paul to the Jewish
religion, either Felix or Festus would have discovered and
punished it. When such things were done by Romans they
could not escape. Undoubtedly therefore Paul had been
as innocent in Judea as lie had been out of it.

Upon the whole then, from the several particulars here
alleged, it must appear highly probable, that the chief offi
cers of such a government as the Roman was at the rise of
the Christian religion, should treat the first preachers of it
just as they are represented by St. Luke to have done.

They had no authority by virtue of any edicts or decrees
then passed, to enter into the controversies then on foot
between several cities in Egypt, who worshipped some one
animal and some another, but none of them the gods of the
Romans. These governors had not been wont to interpose
between any of the sects of the Jews, of which there had
been several for a long time, when no tumult or sedition
arose among them. The Jews it is likely would have
thought it the highest injustice, and would have made
the loudest complaints if they had. The first chris-
tians did not differ more from the pharisees or essenes, I do
not say from the sadducees, than these three sects differed
one from another. How can it be thought then, that these
governors should undertake to suppress the firstd Christians,
when they were obliged to protect all the rest ; not this or
that sect, but all the Jews in general ?

The Roman government protected the many rites of all
their provinces. They protected Jews and heathens in one
and the same city. The Jews had been now for some while,
from time to time, making proselytes of Greeks and Syrians •
converted them to the worship of the true God, the God

d ' When the Romans permitted the Jewish synagogues to use their own

* laws, and proper government, why, I pray, should there not be the same

* alteration allowed to the apostolical churches ? the Roman censure had as

* yet made no difference between the judaizing synagogues of the Jews and the
' Christian synagogues, or churches of the Jews : nor did it permit them to
' live after their own laws, and forbid these.' Dr. Lightfoot, Hebr. and Talmud,
Exerc. on Matt. iv. 23.

The Treatment of the Apostles by Gentiles. 205

whom the Christians preached ; and brought them, some
indeed to part only, others, to the observation of all the pe
culiar rites of their religion. This they had done, and the
presidents gave them no interruption or molestation. Must
not then these officers have esteemed it, as St. Luke repre
sents them to have done, a new species of envy and malice
in the Jews, to bring before them and desire justice against
Paul and his companions, barely because they did not
submit to them in every particular? And must not these
officers have been prepared likewise to control their own
people, when they would have abused Paul for what the
Jews had been permitted to do ; that is, for converting men
to his peculiar sentiments when his principles were not at
all more disagreeable to them, than those of the Jews ; and
his behaviour was far more peaceable and inoffensive than
theirs had been ?

VIII. There is however one difficulty which I am aware
may be started by some persons. If the Roman govern
ment, to which all the world was then subject, was so mild
and gentle, and protected all men in the profession of their
several religious tenets, and the practice of all their peculiar
rites, whence comes it to pass, that there are in their epis
tles so many exhortations to the Christians to patience and
constancy ; and so many arguments of consolations sug
gested to them as a suffering body of men ? Does not the
apostle Paul tell the Philippians, Phil. i. 29, that "to them
it was given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on
him, but also to suffer for his sake ?" And the Thessalo-
nians, 1 Thess. ii. 14, " that they had suffered like things of
their own countrymen; even as they" (the churches of
Judea) "have of the Jews?" Is not Timothy directed,
2 Tim. ii. 2, to " endure hardness as a good soldier of Jesus
Christ" ? Are not the Hebrews reminded, Heb. x. 32, that
they had "endured a great fight of affliction?" Does
not St. Peter intimate, that they whom he wrote to had
" been in heaviness through manifold temptations ?" 1 Pet.
i. 6.

To this I answer,

1. That the account St. Luke has given in the Acts of
the Apostles, of the behaviour of the Roman officers out of
Judea and in it, is confirmed not only by the account I
have given of the genius and nature of the Roman govern
ment, but also by the testimonies of the most ancient chris-
tian writers. The Romans did afterwards depart from these
moderate maxims ; but it is certain that they were governed
by them, as long as the history of the Acts of the Apostles

206 Credibility of the Gospel History.

reaches. Tertullian and divers others do affirm, that Nero
was the first emperor that persecuted the Christians;6 nor
did he begin to disturb them till after Paul had left Rome
the first time he was there, (when he was sent thither by
Festus,) and therefore not till he was become an enemy to
all mankind. And I think, that according to the account
which Tacitus has given of Nero's inhuman treatment of the
Christians at Rome, in the tenth year of his reign, what he
did then was not owing to their having different principles
in religion from the Romans, but proceeded from a desire
he had to throw off from himself the odium of a vile action,
namely, setting fire to the city, which he was generally
charged f with. And Sulpicius Severus, a Christian histo
rian of the fourth century, says the same thing.s

2dly, I answer, that if the reader will be at the pains of
comparing the epistles of the New Testament with the his
tory of the Acts of the Apostles, he will find a perfect
harmony in all these particulars which are mentioned in
both.

Thus St. Paul writes to the Thessalonians, 1 Thess. ii.
14, " Ye became followers of the churches which in Judea
are in Christ Jesus : for ye also have suffered like things
of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews."
And St. Luke informs us, Acts xvii. 5, that at " Thessalo-
nica, the Jews which believed not, moved with envy, took
unto them certain lewd fellows of the baser sort, and
gathered a company, and set all the city on an uproar, and
assaulted the house of Jason."

As, according to St. Luke, they were the Jews who
usually began, or aggravated the disturbances against
Paul ; so Paul himself ascribes his own sufferings, and
those of others likewise, to the Jews. Thus it follows in
the place just now cited from him : 1 Thess. ii. 15, 16,
" who both killed the Lord Jesus and their own prophets,
and have persecuted us ; and they please not God, and are
contrary to all men : forbidding us to speak unto the Gen
tiles that they may be saved." And to the Galatians he
says, Gal. v. 11, " And I, brethren, if I yet preach circum-

e Consulite commentarios vestros : illic reperietis primum Neronem in hanc
sectam, cum maxime Romae orientem, caesariano gladio ferocisse. Tertul.
Apol. cap. 5. Primus omnium persecutes Dei servos. Lactantius de Mortib.
Persecut. c. 2. Hie primus christianorum nomen tollere aggressus est. Sulpic.
Sev. Hist. 1. ii. c. 40.

f Ergo abolendo rumori Nero subdidit reos — Tacit. Ann. xv. c. 44.

g Neque ulla re Nero efficiebat, quin ab eo jussum incendium putaretur.
Igitur vertit invidiam in christianos, actasque in innoxios crudelissimae quaes-
tiones. Sulpic. ibid. c. 41.

The Treatment of the Christians by Gentiles. 207

cision, why do I yet suffer persecution ? Then is the offence
of the cross ceased." From which words it is plain, that
all the apostle's sufferings came from the bigoted Jews ;
and that, if it had not been for them, he might have
preached the gospel quietly enough.

3dly, Though the Romans were masters of the world,
and were governed by these moderate maxims, as I have
shown ; yet the first Christians might be exposed to many
hardships and sufferings, as they certainly were. The
sources of them are very evident. There was a heavy per
secution in Judea, which commenced not long after our
Saviour's ascension, and lasted, probably, several years.
The Jews had a right to call men before the council, could
excommunicate men out of their synagogues, scourge and
beat them ; they could bring men before the governor, and
prosecute for capital crimes. Doubtless, they exerted all
the power they had against the believers, and did other
things they had no right to do ; partly, through connivance
it is likely of the governor, and partly, perhaps, because he
could not hinder them. Then Herod Agrippa was king of
Judea three years and more ; and he, out of his own aver
sion to Christianity, and to please the Jews, was an inveterate
enemy of the followers of Jesus. And after this, when
Judea was again put tinder Roman procurators, beside the
lesser punishments the Jews could inflict themselves, they
could prosecute before the procurators, as they did Paul.
And we find, that though Felix and Festus were both con
vinced of his innocence, yet they did neither of them dare
to release him against the inclinations of the people of their
province. And such was the Jewish influence in this cause,
that by their means Paul was kept two years in prison in
Judea, and as many afterwards at Rome.

As for the sufferings which the Christians were liable to
out of Judea, every one must be sensible, that wherever
Paul, or any other made any considerable number of con
verts among the heathens, many of the common people were
provoked, and would be apt to insult them ; and in some
places, the inferior magistrates might be so weak as to
concur with them, Acts xvi. 22. Besides, the Jews were
numerous every where, throughout the Roman empire.
When Paul was at Lystra, ch. xiv. 19, " there came thither
certain Jews from Antioch and Iconium, who persuaded
the people ; and having stoned Paul, drew him out of
the city, supposing he had been dead." How the Jews
of Thessalonica behaved, we have seen just now, ch. xvii.
5. These very same Jews of Thessalonica followed Paul

208 Credibility of the Gospel History.

and Silas to Bercea, " and stirred up the people," ver.
13. In Achaia, " the Jews made insurrection against Paul,
and brought him before the judgment seat," ch. xviii. 12.
At Ephesus, they would have heightened the rage of the
people, though " the whole city was," before, " filled with
confusion," ch. xix. 29. When this " uproar was ceased,
and Paul was about to sail into Syria, the Jews laid wait
for him," ch. xx. 1 — 3.

Nor ought it to be supposed, that the Jews were incon
siderable enemies. The malicious, however unfurnished,
will always find some weapons ; rage makes men, for a time
at least, strong and terrible. We see a great deal of enmity
against the first followers of Jesus, in the Jewish speeches
and proceedings in Judea and other parts. But perhaps it
is not easy to form a complete idea of it. What vexation
must it not have given to the generality of this people, who
were now in full expectation of subduing the whole world
to themselves, to see a number of men of their own nation
travelling over the Roman empire teaching that Jesus, who
had been crucified, was the Messiah, the great king and
deliverer that had been promised to the Jews ; inviting
Gentiles also to the participation of all the privileges of the
people of God, without insisting on circumcision or other
rites of their law !

The peculiar principles, temper, and disposition of the
Jewish people deserve to be somewhat farther considered
in this place. These were such, that though the Roman
governors had taken the first Christians into their special
protection, they could not have secured them from all
injuries. The Jews then not only scorned subjection
and obedience to others, and affected liberty and inde
pendence, but they expected dominion over all man
kind. This we may perceive from divers characters and
admonitions in the New Testament, and from the writ
ings of Josephus. " They despise governments," says St.
Peter, " presumptuous are they, self-willed : they are not
afraid to speak evil of dignities," 2 Pet. ii. 10. Jude 8.
For this reason, there was so great occasion for those earnest
exhortations to the believers among the Jews, not to follow
the example of the rest of their countrymen, but " to sub
mit themselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's
sake," 1 Pet. ii. 13. Again, " Let none of you," says the same
Apostle, 1 Pet. iv. 15, " suffer as a murderer, or as a thief,
or as an evil-doer, or as a busy body inh other men's mat
ters." This last character, I apprehend, is not generally

h H

The Treatment of the Apostles by Jews and Romans. 209

understood. A mere prying- into, or meddling with the
concerns of private families or particular persons, would
not have been ranked with crimes that exposed to the
severest censures of the civil magistrate. The word, I think,
intends one that affects the inspection and direction of the
affairs of other men ; and in this place relates to the' public
affairs of other people. Of this temper of the Jewish people
at that time, we have a remarkable specimen in the long
passage I have transcribed above, concerning the business
at Alexandria : where divers Jews intruded themselves into
the public councils of the people of that place ; and the
rest of the Jews would have rescued the offenders, or de
stroyed the whole people of Alexandria, if the president had
not been furnished with a good body of regular forces.
We have seen above, k that in the time of Felix, the Jews
at Csesarea were not contented with equal rights of citizen
ship, but would have the preference. They became, after
that, still more and more troublesome and tumultuous.
Their behaviour at Alexandria, just now mentioned, is a
proof of it. The Jews' disdain of other men, and their
thirst of dominion, ran so high at last, that they put the
people of the several countries in which they lived, and the
whole Roman empire, into a fright. They had been hated
before, but now they were feared.1 Josephus says ex
pressly, that the expectation they had of some one from
their country, who would obtain the empire of the world,
was the great thing- that induced them to the war with the

1 The phrase we have here is not that used in other places for an impertinent
inquisitiveness. See 2 Thess. iii. 11; 1 Tim. v. 13. AXXorpioc signifies
sometimes a man of another nation. A\\' fa aXXorpiog wr, TroXtrjje ytyova,
Dionys. H. p. 468. 10. And if it should be still supposed, that Peter intends
only a meddling with private affairs j yet he must refer to a busy, governing
temper, that led them into a very offensive conduct : since these busy bodies
are reckoned up with criminals, who, in those places, could have their proper
punishment from none but the chief Roman officers ; or as Philostratus ex
presses it, judges who had the sword : Suca^a y«p SeiaBai avraq [Siicac tiri
fj.oixvg, &c.] £i0oe t^ovTOQ. Vit. Sophist. 1. i. n. 25. sect. 2.

k P. 193, &c. l Ov fjirjv oi Supot Td)V ladaiuv tXarrov

•TrXrjQos avypsv, a\\a /cat avroi rag £V rate 7ro\E<7i Xa^avo^tv^Q avtatyarrov,
« fiovov Kara p,Lffog, wg TrpoTfpov, aXV r')dr] KO.I rov £(j) tavroiQ Kivdvvov (j>0avov~
7££. Joseph, de B. J. 1. ii. cap. 18. sect. 2. Josephus says, the revolt of the
Jews, A. D. 66, gave Nero a great deal of concern, though he endeavoured to
conceal it. Antiq. 1. xx. c. 1. His appointing Vespasian, the most expe
rienced and successful commander at that time, general in the war, is a proof
of it, especially considering the aversion he had for his person. Peregrinatione
Achaica inter comites Neronis, cum, cantante eo, aut discederet ssepius, aut
praesens obdormisceret, gravissimam contraxit offensam : prohibitusque non
cpntubernio modo, sed etiam publica salutatione, secessit in parvam ac deviam
clvitatem, &c. Sueton. in Vespas. cap. 4. vid. et Tacit. Ann. lib. xvi. cap. 5.
VOL. I. p

210 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Romans.™ If the Romans were not able to preserve the
heathen people from all injuries from the Jews, (as it is
certain0 they were not,) much less could they secure the
Christians, who were above all others the object of their en
vy. And if the Jews thought themselves able to contend
with, and overturn the Roman empire, it cannot be supposed
unlikely, that they should attempt to destroy a Christian,
without asking the Romans leave, when they would not do
it for them.

St. Jerom0 in divers places of his Commentaries, de
scribes the sufferings of the apostles, and the causes and
occasions of them, in a way very agreeable to the account
here given by me.

These discouragements and sufferings then, the first
Christians met with and underwent, whippings in syna-

SDgues, excommunications from the ordinary places of
od's worship, beatings in public market-places : tumults,
some that endangered, others that cost them their lives,
Acts xiv. 19. ch. vii. 54 — 60 ; during the reign of Herod
Agrippa, imprisonment and death ; in the rest of this period,
from the beginning to the end of it, troublesome prosecutions
before heathen governors in Judea, and out of it ; the se
verest reproaches, and dangerous conspiracies, and lyings in
wait of the Jews in all parts ; among the heathen, the scorn
and ridicule of the great and the witty, insults of the com
mon people, and abuses of inferior magistrates ; lastly, perils
from false brethren, who might find it no hard matter to
augment the prejudices, both of Jews and Gentiles, against
a singular set of men.

It may be, I think, reasonably supposed, that the suffer
ings of the followers of Jesus, in the period we are now
concerned with, were not equal to those, which they were
afterwards exposed to, when the Roman emperors treated
them as public enemies, authorized their officers every
where to punish them, and countenanced the common peo
ple in those abuses and outrages they were disposed to of

m See above, p. 138. n Vid. Joseph, de Bell. lib. ii.

c. 18. sect. 1, 5. et alibi. ° Quod autem crebro Paulus

in carcere fuerit, et de vinculis liberatus sit, ipse in alio loco dicit : in carceri-
bus frequenter, de quibus nonnunquam Domini auxilio, crebro ipsis persecuto-
ribus nihil dignum in eo morte invenientibus, dimittebatur. Nee dum enim
super nomine christiano senatusconsulta praecesserant : nee dum christianum
sanguinem Neronius gladius dedicarat. Sed pro novitate prsedicationis, sive a
Judoeis invidentibus, sive ab his qui sua videbant idola destrui, ad furorem
populis concitatis, missi in carcerem, rursum, impetu et furore deposito, laxa-
t-antur, &c. Hieron. Comm. in Ep. ad Philem. p. 453. Conf. eund. in Ep.
ad Gal. c. vi. p. 315.

The Treatment of the Apostles by Jews and Gentiles. 211

themselves. Much less did they equal the torments which
good men have undergone, since men of the most exquisite
malice and subtilty, in several ages, have improved perse
cution into a science, and devoted themselves to this work
as their solemn business and profession ; till at length they
have completed this worst of all inventions, and with a
dexterity truly diabolical, have at once increased the fa
tigue of the sufferer, and abated the horror and compassion
of all heedless and inconsiderate spectators. These things
perhaps may (but these only could) make us think the
difficulties, dangers, and sufferings of the first christians
small.

But yet, after all, if we duly consider the vast sensibility
of human nature to pain and disgrace ; I believe it will be
allowed, that the subsistence and growth of Christianity,
under the discouragements it met with in its very infancy,
at a time when there had been but few examples of patience
and constancy under sufferings, in any case that bears any
near resemblance with this, are a strong argument in favour
of its divine original ; and a proof, that they who then em
braced it, and were steady in the profession of it, were, upon
the best evidences, fully persuaded of the facts on which it
depends ; and were animated by the hopes of that great
reward, which is one distinguished article of the Christian
doctrine.

212 Credibility of the Gospel History.

CHAP. IX.

CONCERNING DIVERS OPINIONS AND PRACTICES
OF THE JEWS.

I. The Jews, at the time of their great feasts, came up to
Jerusalem in great numbers, from all parts. II. The
Jews of Jerusalem frequented the temple at other times.
III. Their hours of prayer. IV. Their zeal for the tem
ple. V. For the law. VI. Of their synagogue worship.
VII. They practised at this time the vow of the Nazarite,
and shaved their heads. VIII. Of their inflicting forty
stripes save one. IX. Of private zeal. X. The paying
tribute to the Romans, a great grievance to the Jews.
XI. Nevertheless there were publicans of the Jewish
nation.

THE Jews appear to have been, in the time of our Saviour
and his apostles, very zealous for the temple, and devout
and exact in the observation of the rituals of the Mosaic
law. The New Testament abounds with proofs of this zeal.
I shall take notice of some instances.

I. They came up to Jerusalem at the feasts, in great
numbers, not only from those parts of Judea that lay near
the city, but also from Galilee, and likewise from foreign
countries, where they resided. John iv. 3, " He [Jesus]
left Judea, and departed into Galilee. Ver. 45, Then when
he was come into Galilee, the Galileans received him,
having seen all the things that he did at Jerusalem at the
feast, for they also went unto the feast. — Ch. vii. 1 — 4.
After these things Jesus walked in Galilee. — Now the Jews'
feast of tabernacles was at hand. His brethren therefore
said unto him, Depart hence, and go into Judea, that thy
disciples also may see the works that thou doest : For there
is no man that doeth any thing in secret, and he himself
seeketh to be known openly : if thou do these things, show
thyself to the world." This reasoning of theirs is built
upon the supposition, that there would be a general resort
at Jerusalem, " at the feast of tabernacles, which was then
at hand." Ch. xi. 55, 56, " And the Jews' passover was nigh
at hand, and many went out of the country, up to Jerusa
lem, before the passover, to purify themselves. Then
sought they for Jesus, and spake among themselves, as they

Jewish Opinions and Practices. 213

stood in the temple, what think ye, that he will not come
unto the feast ? - Ch. xii. 12, 13, And on the next day
much people that were come to the feast, when they heard
that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, took branches of
palm-trees and went forth to meet him. — Ver. 23, And there
were certain Greeks among them that came up to worship
at the feast." See Acts. ii. 5.

I shall set down from Josephus evidences of all these
particulars.

* At that timea the feast was approaching, in which the

* Jews are wont to eat unleavened bread. The feast is

* called the passover, and is kept in remembrance of their
4 departure out of Egypt : they observe it with great joy,

* and at this feast offer up more sacrifices than at any other,

* and an innumerable multitude of persons come up to
' worship God, not only out of Judea, but also from other
1 parts.' b

Again, * When the feast which is called the passover was
6 nigh,c in which it is our custom to eat unleavened bread,
' and a great multitude was gathered together from all

* part*,* Cumanus fearing some disturbance might happen
' among them, ordered a cohort of the soldiers to take
' their arms, and post themselves in the porticoes of the

* temple.' e

Again, ' From Antipatris Cestius marched to Lydda, but
' found no men in it, for all the people were gone up to Je-

* rusalem, to the feastf of tabernacles. However, meeting

* with fifty men, he slew them all, burnt the city, and went

* forwards, and pitched his camp at a place called Gabao,
' at the distance of fifty stadia from Jerusalem. The Jews
4 perceiving the enemy to approach to their metropolis,
' neglecting the feast, betook themselves to their arms ; and
' placing great confidence in their numbers, marched out
4 to the fight with loud shouts, but very little order, not so

* much as minding the rest of the seventh day. For it
' happened to be the sabbath, which is respected and ob-

* served by them above all others.' s This sabbath is the
day spoken of, John vii. 37, where it is called, " the last
day, that great day of the feast ;" of which Moses says,
" It is a solemn assembly, and ye shall do no servile work
therein," Lev. xxiii. 36.

a Year before Christ 3, or 4. It was the passover next after Herod's death.
b Kare«ri Se Tr\r]Qvg avaptfyiTjrog tK TTJQ xwPa£> V^ $e Kai fK TrIQ
em SprjffKti TS Qea. Jos. Ant. lib. xvii. c. 9. sect. 3.

c A. D. 48. d UavraxoOev. e Ant. lib. xx. c. 4. sect,

' A. D. 66. « Pe B. J. lib. ii. cap. 19. init.

214 Credibility of the Gospel History.

But the number of people that resorted to Jerusalem
upon these occasions, will appear more particularly from a
computation, which the priests made at the passover of this
very same year.11

Cestius, just now mentioned, president of Syria, desired
the priests to number the people, if they had any way of
doing- it. ' The feast of the passover was then at hand, in

* which they kill sacrifices from the ninth to the eleventh

* hour : and there is concerned in each sacrifice, a sort of

* fraternity, of at the least ten in number, and sometimes

* twenty. The priests then endeavoured to gratify him, and
' they found the number of sacrifices amount to two hun-

* dred fifty-six thousand five hundred. And reckoning- a
' company of ten to each sacrifice, the whole number of

* persons must have been two millions and seven hundred

* thousand,1 and these all clean and pure. For all leprous
1 persons, — and all who are under any kind of defilement,
' are excluded from this sacrifice, as are also the strangers
' that come up to worship. 'k

The concluding sentence of this passage is a proof, that
some strangers, Greeks as St. John calls them, ch. xii. 20,
did come up to the Jewish feasts. These are the persons,
who are called devout men, and men that fear God. They
are also termed proselytes of the gate. If they had been
proselytes of righteousness, that is, circumcised, they would
have had a right to eat of the passover. For so was the
law : " This is the ordinance of the passover : there shall
no stranger eat thereof. But every man's servant that is
bought for money, when thou hast circumcised him, then
shall he eat thereof," Exod. xii. 43, 44.

In another place Josephus says, that when this Cestius
Gallus came to Jerusalem, a little before this very same
feast of the passover, he was surrounded by the people
there, to the number of three millions, who made their com
plaints to him against their own procurator1 Gessius Florus :
and, as Dr. Hudson has observed, this number does mightily
correspond with the above-mentioned computation ; for if
the number of those who were clean was 2,700,000, it is

h 66. * There is some error in one of these numbers

in Josephus. For 256,500, which was the number of the sacrifices, multi
plied by ten, make but 2,565,000. But Dr. Hudson says, that some are for
reading the number of the sacrifices 270,000, which multiplied by ten makes
the number of persons here mentioned.

k Ttvovrai oT avBpwv, iv tKa^s dtKa ^airv^iovaQ Sw/iEv, fivpiafitg ef3dofir]KOvra
Kai dictKoaiai, KaOapwv airavTwv, KOI ayiwv. — AXX' sdt roif aXAo^uAoif ocrot
Kara Spjiaictiav Trapijeav. De Bell. lib. vi. cap. 9. sect. 3.

1 De Bell. lib. ii. p. 1078. 19.

Jewish Opinions mid Practices. 215

easy to conclude, that if the unclean be added to this sum,
the number of all the people might be three millions.

II. As there was a great resort to Jerusalem, from all
parts, at the feasts, so they who resided at Jerusalem, seem
to have frequented the temple very much at other times
also. This appears very plainly in the Acts of the Apostles,
ch. ii. 46, " And they [all that believed] continued daily
with one accord in the temple.— Acts iii. 1—9, Now Peter
and John went up together into the temple, at the hour of

Erayer, being the ninth hour ; and a certain man lame from
is mother's womb was carried, whom they laid daily at the
gate of the temple, which is called Beautiful, to ask alms of
them that entered into the temple. — And all the people saw
him walking." See ch. v. 20—25.

Josephus tells this story of Alexandra, mother of Herod's
wife Mariamne. Herod laym sick at Samaria, and he was
thought to be near his end. ' Alexandra was at that time

* at Jerusalem, and having constant intelligence brought to

* her of his case, she endeavoured to get the two forts, which

* are in the city, into her own hands ; (one is properly a
' guard upon the city, as the other is upon the temple ;)

* for they who have these in their possession, have the whole

* nation in subjection to them ; because that without these
' they cannot come to offer sacrifices. But it is impossible

* for any Jew to omit these. They can sooner cease to
' breathe, than neglect the worship they are wont to pay to
' God."1 ^

III. We had just now mention made of the ninth hour as
one of the Jews' hours of prayer. Another hour of prayer
is referred to in another place. When the disciples had been
filled with the Holy Ghost, after our Saviour's ascension,
and spake with divers tongues, there was a reflection cast
upon them, Acts ii. 13, " Others, mocking, said, These men
are full of new wine." St. Peter confutes them in this
manner, ver. 15, " For these are not drunken, as ye suppose,
seeing it is but the third hour of the day." The argument
depends on the custom of the Jews, who used to attend
their morning prayer fasting.

Josephus says : * Twice every day, in the morning and at
' the ninth hour, the priests perform their duty at the altar,

* and omit not the sacrifices, though in the greatest distress
' of a siege.'0 These then were the two hours of perform-

m Year before Christ 28. vid. Basnage, Ann. P. E.

n To de fJLri Tctvra avvreXav aStvi IsSaiwv Swarov, TH Zyv troifiorspov av
TrapaxwprjffarTitiv ij r;/f S'pjjcrfceiaf, fjv £i£ TOV Qtov eidiBa&i ovvTt\uv. Antiq.
lib. xv. cap. 7. sect. 8. ° AXXa hq TIJQ »7/i£f;ag, irpoi re

216 Credibility of the Gospel History.

ing sacrifices at the temple : and it is likely, that a great
number of devout Jews, who lived at Jerusalem, usually
went up to the temple at those hourg.

IV. The Jews are represented to have had a very high
veneration for the temple, as not able to hear any thing
said of it that was not honourable ; and as solicitous to pre
serve it from every thing which they thought a pollution of
it. Acts vi. 13, " And set up false witnesses, which said,
This man [Stephen] ceaseth not to speak blasphemous
words against this holy place and the law." — Ch. xxi. 27,
28, " The Jews which were of Asia stirred up all the peo
ple, and laid hands on him, [Paul.] crying out, Men of
Israel, help : This is the man that teacheth all men every
where against the people, and the law, and this place. And
farther, brought Greeks into the temple, and hath polluted
this holy place."

I have already given in this work, from Philo and Jose
ph us, many evidences of the veneration the Jews of this time
had for the temple. I add here one passage more from
Philo, in which the Jewish resolution to preserve the purity
of the temple, is represented by him in the strongest terms
that can be used. ' One thing, says he, we desire instead
' of all others, that no novelty be introduced into the tem-
* pie, but that it be preserved such as we have received it
' from our forefathers. If we cannot obtain this, we yield
' up ourselves to be destroyed, that we may not live to see
' a greater evil than death.'?

We must pursue the story of the Jews seizing St. Paul
at Jerusalem, though it was transcribed above upon another
occasion. Acts xxi. 30 — 32, " And all the city was
moved, and the people ran together ; and they took Paul,
and drew him out of the temple. — And as they went to kill
him, tidings came to the chief captain of the band, that all
Jerusalem was in an uproar," &c.

A soldier of the Roman guard at the temple had been
guilty of a very indecent action there, and vented some rude
expressions in the hearing of the Jews. ' At this the whole
' multitude was moved with indignation, and cried out, that
' Cumanus ought to punish the soldier. But some young
' people and others with them of a warm disposition, im-

KUI Trepi tvva.Tr]v wpav, tepapyavrwv CTTI rs /3wju«, /cat fJW]&, ei TI Trcpt Tag Trpoo1-
PO\CIQ tW/coXov firj, Tag $rv0ia£ TrapitvTaiv. Antiq. lib. xiv. cap. 4. sect. 3.

p 'Ev avn TTCLVTWV aira^eQa, ju?j$tv tv Tip ifp^> yivtaQat, vewrtpoj', aXXa <f>v-
\a%9r)vai TOIOVTOV, oiov Trapa TIDV TraTnrwv icai Trpoyovwv TrapfXaftopev' ti Be
Qofjin', irapadidofjiev iavTsg fiQ a7T(i)\£iav> wa
KaKov. De Leg. p. 1025. E.

Jewish Opinions and Practices. 217

* mediately made a tumult, and began to throw stones at

* the soldiers. Cumanus, fearing lest all the people should

* make an assault upon him, sent for more soldiers. When
' they had posted themselves in the porticos, the Jews were
' thrown into a prodigious fright, and fled from the temple
' into the city. So great was the crowd in the passages,
' that ten thousand were pressed or trod to death.' 1

These two cases have this difference, that in the latter
there had been a manifest affront offered to the temple ; but
in the former they only supposed there had been one. For
the rest, there is a great agreement : the temper of the peo
ple is much the same, and they were for immediately doing
themselves justice : and a strong body of soldiers is brought
to keep the peace.

V. The Jews' great respect for the law appears in some
texts already transcribed in this chapter, and in many other
places of the New Testament, some of which cannot but
occur to the reader's thoughts.

Not long* after the just mentioned insolence at the temple,
A soldier having found the sacred law in a certain vil
lage, tore the book to pieces and threw it into the fire.
The Jews were hereupon no less astonished than if the
whole country had been in flames ; and all with one ac
cord, out of concern for their religion, as if moved by one
common spring, flocked to Cumanusr at Csesarea, and
entreated him that the man who had offered this affront to
God and the law might not go unpunished. He, per
ceiving the multitude was not to be appeased unless some
satisfaction were given them, ordered the soldier to be
brought forth, and to be led through the crowd of his ac
cusers, and put to death.'

VI. Beside the great resort to Jerusalem at the feasts,
and the worship at the temple at their seasons, and the re
gard expressed for the temple itself and the law, we have
in the New Testament frequent mention of the synagogue
worship. Luke iv. 17 — 20, " And he [Jesus] came to
Nazareth, and as his custom was, he went into the syna
gogue on the sabbath-day, and stood up for to read. And
there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet
Esaias." Acts xv. 21, " For Moses of old time hath in
every city them that preach him, being read in the syna
gogues every sabbath-day:"

q De B. J. lib. ii. cap. 12. sect. 1. T InSaioi de, we O\TIQ

TT)£ xwP°C Kara^Xf-yaffTjf, ffvvexvQrjffav, KCLI KaQcnrep opyavy TIVI ry
awtXicoptvoi, eiQ iv KJ/pvyjua Travrtg «£ Kaiaapeuev £7Ti ~K.8fi.avov
*• X. Ibid. sect. 2.

218 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Nor had they only readings of the law and the prophets,
but they had discourses made in their synagogues. " And
when he was come into his own country, he taught them in
their synagogue. And straightway on the sabbath-day he
entered into their synagogue and taught" Matt. xiii. 54 ;
Mark i. 21. " And it came to pass in Iconium, that they
went both together [Paul and Barnabas] into the synagogue
of the Jews, and so spake, that a great multitude both of
the Jews and also of the Greeks believed," Acts xiv. 1.

A passage or two from Josephus and Philo will confirm
both these particulars. Josephus in his second book against
Apion, speaking of Moses, says : * And that men might not
have the pretence of ignorance for their transgression, (in
points he before mentioned,) he gave us the law, the most
excellent of all institutions. Nor did he appoint that it
should be heard once only, or twice, or often, but that
laying aside all other works we should meet together
every week to hear it read, and gain a perfect understand-
« ing."

Josephus relates a difference which happened between
the Greeks and Jews at Csesarea in the 12th year of
Nero's i reign. The Jews presented a petition to Florus
their procurator. He made them fair promises, but imme
diately went from Csesarea to Sebaste, without taking care
about the matter. — * The next day being the seventh day,
' as the Jews were coming' to the synagogue, a turbulent
' fellow of Cfesarea brought an earthen vessel, and having
6 placed it with the bottom uppermost, sacrificed birds as
' the Jews were coming in. This provoked the Jews ex-

* tremely, to see their laws thus insulted and the place de-
' filed.' — It was impossible to compose them ; they and the
Coesareans had a battle. Jucundus, a Roman officer who
was there, came in to the assistance of the Jews, but he had
but a few men with him. * He being" overpowered by the
' violence of the Caesareans, the Jews taking the laws with-

* drew to Narbata, a place sixty stadia distant from Ccesa-
6 rea.'u

There should be some evidence of their having discourses
made in their synagogues. This I shall give in the words
of Philo. ' And from that time [the days of Moses] to

QvSt yap rr\v air ayvoiag vTTOTi^irjffiv rjveaxfTO KaraXnreiv, a\\a KOI tta\-
KCII ava.yKaiQTa.Tov a7Ttdti£,t TraiCtvpaTWV TOV VO^JLOV' SK tiaaTraZ, aKpoaaa-
, «$e Sig rj TroXAaicif, a\X' tKa^r]Q £/3£ojua$of, TOJV aXXwv tpywv atyffjttvsg,
tTTi rrjv aicpoacrtv 7*8 vofjis tKtXfVfft rrvXXeye<jOai Kai TSTOV aicpifBwG fKfj,av9avtiv'
p. 1378. in. ' A. D. 66. u De Bell. lib. ii. cap. 14.

sect. 5.

Jewish Opinions and Practices, 219

this, the Jews are wont to inculcate the principles of their
religion on the seventh days, setting apart that time to the
study and contemplation of the things of nature : for the
oratories which are in every city, what are they but
schools of wisdom, of fortitude, sobriety, justice, and piety,
and of every virtue ?'v
I believe that very few of our modern Jewish antiquaries
are of Philo's and Josephus's opinion, that the synagogue
worship is an institution of Moses ; but I think none will
contest their authority, that the Jews frequented the syna-
gog'ues on the sabbath-day at the time they wrote.

VII. When Paul had been acquitted by Gallic at Corinth,
it is said, Acts xviii. 18, " After this he tarried there yet a
good while, and then took his leave of the brethren, and
sailed thence into Syria, and with him Priscilla and Aquila:
having shorn his head in Cenchrea : for he had a vo-v.
And he came to Ephesus, - and from thence he sailed to
Caesarea, and went up to Jerusalem." We have again
mention made of this very same custom, or one very near
akin to it, when Paul went up to Jerusalem several years
after this ; and James and all the elders that were there
gave him some advice for the taking' off the aspersions, that
had been cast upon him by the Jews. Acts xxi. 23, 24,
" Do therefore this that we say unto thee : We have four
men which have a vow on them ; them take, and purify
thyself with them, that they may shave their heads." Ver.
26, " Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying
himself with them entered into the temple, to signify the
accomplishment of the days of purification, until that an
offering should be offered for every one of them."

The reader may do well to consult here the law of the
Nazarite, as delivered by Moses, Num. vi. 13 — 18.

That this custom was in use among' the Jews at the time
of the evangelical history, is evident from what Josephus
has said of Bernice. * She was thenw at Jerusalem per-
' forming a vow to God : for it is customary for those who
' have been afflicted with some distemper, or have laboured
' under any other difficulties, to make a vow, thirty days

* before they offer sacrifices, to abstain from wine, and shave

* the hair of their head.'*

^ ov RCII eifftTi vvv tyioaofy&ai TCLIQ £>jwat£ laatot rt]v Trarptov
<ptav, TOV %povov avaBevTEQ £7rtT?//z$ icai Sfwpia rwv Trept <f>vmv ra yap Kara
•xroXag TrpoatVKTrfpia, TI irepov t~iv, i\ 8iSa<TKa\£ia 0poi/?j<7£W£ icai av$pia£ /cat
ff(jj(f>c)offvvT]g /cat diKaioffWTjg £i><T£/3«a£ Tt /cat offiorrjroQ, Kai avfJ-Traffrjc ap£r?j£.
Lib. iii. de Vit. Mos. p. 685. D.

w A. D. 66. x EireSrjuti <$t tv rote 'IspoffoXvp

T(p Qeq)' T&Q yap 77 vocr^t KaTcnrovt)[iev»(;, rj TIGIV a\\ai£ avay/catc,

220 Credibility of the Gospel History.

CappelJy indeed does make a doubt, whether the vow of
the four men in the Acts, or of Bernice in Josephus, be
the vow of the Nazarite. But I see no good reason for this
doubt. However he allows theirs and Bernice's vow to
have been of one and the same nature.

Josephus says, it was a custom to make a vow of thirty
days. There is no particular time prescribed for the vow
of the Nazarite in the law of Moses. And it is my opinion,
that the only reason of Josephus's mentioning that particu
lar number here was, because it happened to be the term of
Bernice's vow, of which he had occasion to speak.

There may be a difficulty raised with reference to St.
Paul's vow at Cenchrea ; because the Jewish writers say,
that a Nazarite ought not to be out of the land of Israel ;z
and in the law of Moses it is said, Num. vi. 18, " the Naza-
rite shall shave the head of his separation, at the door of
the tabernacle of the congregation." This is some diffi
culty : but I am very much inclined to think, that notwith
standing all their zeal, they did at this time dispense with
the exactness of many things required in the law of
Moses. It seems to be the necessary consequence of their
living, as there now did great numbers of them, at a vast
distance from Jerusalem. Was there any law more express
than this? " Three times a year shall all thy males appear
before the Lord thy God in the place that he shall choose,"
Dent. xvi. 16, Exod. xxiii. 17. But this they could not do
who lived in Italy or Persia.

Moreover, it seems there is a rule in the Jewish books,
* that they who make the vow of the Nazarite out of the
6 land of Israel shall go into it to complete thea vow.' This

ai Trpo TpicucovTo. >;jufpwv, rjg aTrowffeiv ^eowv vGiag, oivs rt
Oai, KM ZvprjaaaOai rag Ko^ag. Hierosolymis quippe agebat ut vota Deo
solveret : nam iis qui rnorbo laboraverant, aut in angustias quascunque con-
jecti fuerant, moris erat precibus vacare xxx. diebus, antequam victimas obla-
turi essent, et vino abstinere, et radere comam. De Bell. lib. ii. c. 15. init.
Upon a review, I find my translation of this passage is somewhat different
from the common interpretation ; and therefore I have subjoined Dr. Hudson's
version to the original. But I can see no reason why tvxtvOai should be
rendered orare, as in Rufinus's version, or precious vacare, as in Dr. Hudson's;
since they have translated evxrjv t/creXscra, ut vota deo solveret. Besides,
prayer is not mentioned in the law of the Nazarite ; nor is it ever reckoned
up, that I know of, in the catalogue of the ten precepts and prohibitions,
which belonged to the Nazarite. Vid Reland. Ant. Heb. de personis sacris.
p, 274. y Spicileg. in Act. Apost. xxi. 23.

z Nee. licebat Naziraeo esse extra terram Israeliticam. Nazir. iii. 6. Reland.
ubi supra, p. 277. a Si quis vovisset Nazireatum extra terram,

proficisci debuit in terram, et illic votum implere. Eduioth. iv. 11. apud
Reland. ubi supra.

Jewish Opinions and Practices. 221

will go a great way toward solving the difficulty, if it will
but be allowed, that this was the reason of St. Paul's great
concern to " keep the next feast at Jerusalem." Thus St.
Luke's account stands, Acts xviii. 9 — 22, after Paul was
come to Corinth, — " Then spake the Lord to Paul in the
night by a vision ; Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not
thy peace : For I am with thee ; and no man shall set on
thee to hurt thee. — And when Gallio was the deputy of
Achaia, the Jews made insurrection with one accord against
Paul ; and brought him to the judgment-seat." Paul was
now in great danger, and was delivered. " And Paul after
this tarried there yet a good while, and then took his leave
of the brethren, and sailed thence into Syria, and with him
Priscilla and Aquila, having shorn his head in Cenchrea :
for he had a vow. And he came to Ephesus, and left them
there : but he himself entered into the synagogue, and rea
soned with the Jews. When they desired him to tarry
longer time with them, he consented not : but bade them
farewell, sayingy I must by all means keep this feast that
cometh in Jerusalem. — And he sailed from Ephesus. And
when he had landed at Caesarea, and gone up and saluted
the church, he went down to Antioch."

There is nothing in this relation that contradicts the sup
position, that St. Paul's vow was the occasion of his going
to Jerusalem at this time : or, in other words, that he went
thither to complete his vow, and offer the appointed sacri
fices ; but there is a great deal to countenance it. The
Lord had appeared to Paul, and promised to stand by him.
Paul had actually been in a great danger, and received a
very signal deliverance. It is likely, that at this season, or
soon after, he made a vow : and perhaps had made the
engagement to take the vow when the Lord appeared to
him.

The account of his setting out from Corinth and going to
Syria, begins with the mention of the vow ; and Paul makes
all possible expedition to get to Jerusalem. When he
comes thither he makes no long stay: and the " saluting
the church" could not be the principal end of this journey,
for that imports no more than a compliment of civility. St.
Luke, it is true, does not mention expressly any thing which
St. Paul did at Jerusalem beside saluting the church : but
there was no necessity he should. The occasion of his
going thither appears in the beginning of the account.
And it is likely, that this was then so well understood that
he could not be more particular without an unnecessary
repetition. Throw away his design, that St. Luke has been

222 Credibility of the Gospel History.

guilty of a very great omission : and though Paul was in
great haste to get to Jerusalem, there is no hint at all what
was aimed at in the journey. Take in this design, and then
we have here a complete story.

It is true St. Paul says : " I must by all means keep this
feast that cometh in Jerusalem." But the feast time was
not the only reason, because Paul did not keep every feast
there. There was*some particular inducement to this feast,
which seems to me to be this : St. Paul was obliged, on
account of his vow, to go to Jerusalem about this time ; and
a feast then approaching, it was certainly most eligible to
be there at that season.

I have taken no notice of Grotius'sb opinion, who thought
it was Aquila and not Paul who had this vow at Cenchrea :
because, though there may be some ambiguity in the words
themselves, yet the whole thread of St. Luke's narration
renders it much more probable, if not certain, that St. Paul
is the person spoken of. And learned men seern to be
generally convinced of it.c

The vow at Cenchrea, whether Paul's or Aquila's, and
" the four men" at Jerusalem " who had a vow," are an
argument that this piece of devotion was not uncommon
among the Jews at this time. Joseph us has assured us
expressly it was not. But there is something very parti
cular in the advice given to Paul, Acts xxi. 24, namely,
that he " should take these men and be at charges with
them, that they may shave their heads." A This may incline
us to suppose, that it was an usual thing now for zealous
men who had it in their power, to bear the whole, or at least
a part of the charges, which a Nazarite was to be at when
his vow was expired. It seems to have been a pretty heavy
offering which was required of them. Perhaps this might
give rise to this custom : but whatever was the reason of it,
it appears to have been a common practice.

The emperor Claudius, in the beginning of his reign,
made Herod Agrippa king of all Judea. * And he, (Jose-
' phus says,) as it was very likely for one to do, who had so
' considerable an advancement, made all the expedition he
' could into his kingdom ; and coming to Jerusalem, he
' offered up sacrifices of thanksgiving, and omitted nothing

* that was prescribed by the law. For which reason, he

* also ordered a good number of Nazarites to be shaved.'6

b In Acts xviii. 18. c Whitby, in loc. Cleric. Hist. Ecc.

An. 54. n. 1. Basnage, Ann. P. E. Vol. i. p. 657. n. 6.

d Kat dcnravrjaov tit avroig, Iva ZvpriGwvTcci ri]v Kt^aX^v.

e Ato feat Na£ipcuwr %vpaa9ai 8itTa%i /iaXa av^vsg. Jos. Ant. lib. xix. c, 6. init.

Jewish Opinions and Practices. 223

And here we have a remarkable agreement between the
style of St. Luke and Josephus. St. Luke does not say, —
" Be at charges with them," that they may perform sacri
fices or make their offerings, but that they may " shave
their heads." We learn from Josephus, that this was the
common phrase among the Jews at this time.

We see likewise, how very proper this advice, given by
the brethren, was to answer the purpose for which it was
intended. It seems to have been a popular action. It was
one of those things by which Agrippa obliged the Jews
when he took possession of the kingdom.

VIII. St. Paul says, 2 Cor. xi. 24, « Of the Jews five
times received I forty stripes save one." The number of
stripes limited by Moses was forty. Deut. xxv. 3, " Forty
stripes he may give him and not exceed." But the Jews at
this time understood themselves to be confined to thirty-
nine. For Josephus gives us this law of Moses : ' He that
6 acts contrary hereto, let him receive forty stripes wanting
4 onef from the public officer.'

IX. We have in the New Testament divers examples of
a strange kind of zeal, sometimes called, I think, by learned
men, ' private zeal.' The Jews seem not to have made any
scruple at all of putting a man to death without any the least
form of a legal process, if he had said or done any thing
which they judged a diminution of their religion. There
were several attempts of this kind made upon the life of our
Saviour, Luke iv. 28, 29 ; John viii. 59. We have many
instances of such attempts made upon Paul. — " And when
the Jews laid wait for him, — he purposed to return through
Macedonia," Acts xx. 3. This design was concerted by
them in Greece. Afterwards, when he was at Jerusalem,
" the Jews which were of Asia stirred up all the people,
and laid hands on him. — And as they were about to kill him,
tidings came unto the chief captain of the band, that all
Jerusalem was in an uproar," ch. xxi. 27 — 31.

The next day after this popular tumult, that the chief
captain " might know the certainty wherefore he was ac
cused, he called the chief priests and the whole council to
gether," and had Paul examined before them. But a dis
sension arising amongst them, he took Paul from them and
brought him again into the castle.

The Jews observing this, and finding they were not like
to obtain a sentence with the expedition they wished for,
and fearing possibly they should never get such an one as

f 'O fo Trapa ravra 7roi»j<ra£, TrX^yag fiiy, XnrsffaQ TiaaapaKovra
\a/3wv. Antiq. lib. iv. cap. 8. sect. 21.

224 Credibility of the Gospel History.

they desired ; " When it was day certain of them banded
together, and bound themselves under a curse, saying, that
they would neither eat nor drink till they had killed Paul.
And they were more than forty which had made this con
spiracy. And they came to the chief priests and elders,
and said, We have bound ourselves under a great curse,
that we will eat nothing till we have slain Paul. Now
therefore, ye with the council signify to the chief captain,
that he bring him down to you to-morrow, as though ye
would inquire something more perfectly concerning him :
and we, or ever he come near, are ready to kill him," Acts
xxiii. 10 — 15.

Here are forty men who enter into a conspiracy to take
away Paul's life in a clandestine manner ; and they make
no scruple to declare it to the council, relying upon their
approbation. And it is plainly implied, that they entered
readily into the measures they were to take for the accom
plishing this vile design.

They were now disappointed by the vigilance of Lysias,
who was chief captain at Jerusalem under Felix. But no
sooner was Festus come into the province but they renew
the same design. And, it is likely, they hoped to have
surprised their new governor. It was very fit he should
be gracious at his first arrival ; and how could he suspect
any harm, who was as yet a stranger among them ? " Now
when Festus was come into the province, after three days
he ascended from Caesarea to Jerusalem. Then the high
priest and the chief of the Jews informed him against Paul,
and besought him, and desired favour against him that he
would send for him to Jerusalem, laying wait in the way to
kill him,'9 Acts xxv. 1—3.

If we had remaining any considerable number of the
Jewish writers who flourished about this time, one might
justly expect, (if we have here a true representation of these
facts,) to find in them some traces of a principle that might
produce such a behaviour, and possibly some examples re
sembling those here related. And though we have but
very few of their writers come down to us, yet we have
authentic evidences of a principle which obtained amongst
them at this time, and which must necessarily have carried
them into the conduct here described.

We have this principle laid down in Philo : he is speak
ing of what may be done toward a Jew that forsakes the
worship of the true God. ' Ands it is highly proper,' says

g Kai 67rirerpa00ai de KaXov airaat TQIQ ZrjXov i^soiv ap£r»jf, 6/c
rag r«/iwpta£, JU^TC «£ S '

Jewish Opinions and Practices. 225

he * that all who have a zeal for virtue, should have a right
« to punish with their own hands without delay those who
' are guilty of this crime : not carrying them before a court

* of judicature, or the council, or any magistrate whatso-

* ever ; but to indulge the abhorrence of evil, the love of

* God their minds are filled with, in the immediate punish-
' ment of those impious wretches ; reckoning that they are
' for that time all things, senators, judges, praetors, Serjeants,

* accusers, witnesses, the laws, the people ; that nothing

* hindering, they may without fear espouse the cause of

* piety.'

Philo here recommends this conduct toward those that
forsake the true God ; and he after this illustrates his prin
ciple from the example of Phinehas, Num. xxv. 7,

Let us next see how Josephus speaks concerning this
point. When he has given the abridgment of the laws of
Moses he says, that Moses having delivered them, ' called

* together the people with their wives and their children,
' their slaves being present likewise ; and adjured them to
' observe his laws, — and that if any one of their kindred, or
' if any city, should attempt to alter or dissolve the form of
1 government they were under, they should both jointly

* and singly (or publicly and privately) take vengeance of
' them.h And if they were not able to take punishment of
' them, they should however make it appear that such
' things had not been done with their consent. And the

* multitude swore to do so.'

One would think, from what Josephus here says, that
they understood this obligation to extend not only to the
case of idolatry, but to every branch of their laws. If they
did so, it must have occasioned many extravagant attempts
at this time ; when by means of the Roman power, they
were unable in the way of legal processes to gratify their
zeal ; which, it is certain, ran very high at this time.

What Josephus says is the more to be regarded, in that
these books of his Jewish Antiquities were professedly
written by him for the information of the Greeks and Ro
mans. And therefore it cannot be supposed, he would give
a more offensive view of this transaction than was absolutely

avvoXwQ ETT' apx*]v ayovrctf, crXXa Ty Trapa^avn iiiGOTrovijptp iraQu Kat
Kar«xp7/(T0ai Trpog TO.Q TUV aatfiuv aTrapairrjrsg KoXaatig, vofjmravTag
avrns VTTO TS Kaips TO. iravra ytytvrjaOai, /3«X«vrag, dim-rag, TparTjysf, tKK\rj-
oia^ag, Kar?jyop8£, ^uaprvpag, vofji&c;, Srjfjiov, iva p,rjSevog OVTOQ ffirroScJv, cupofloi
avvoStii TTo\\y 7rpoayam£wvrai o<noTT)TO£. Philo de Monarch, lib. i. p. 8 1 8. D. E.
AXX' av TS. TLQ roiv &, aif.ia.roQ ovyxuv KCLI KaraXvetv nrixtipy TTJV icar'
avrag TroXiraar, av TI TroXtg, a^vvtiv UVTSQ icat teoivy teat Kar' iSiav' COS et
pubhce et privatim ulciscerentur. Huds. vers. Antiq. 1. iv. c. 8. sect. 45.
VOL. I. Q

226 Credibility of the Gospel History.

necessary to satisfy the Jews of those times, who might hap
pen to see his performance.

Beside the discovery these two writers have made of the
principle itself, there is in Josephus a story of a conspiracy
against Herod which may not be omitted.

* Now Herod deviated more and more from our ancient
' customs, and by foreign inventions corrupted our constitu-
' tion, which is inviolable. He instituted quinquennial
' games in honour of Ccesar, and built a theatre at Jerusa-
' lem. The magnificence of these works was admired by

* foreigners, but to the Jews these things appeared to be a
' breach upon those laws which they highly respected.
' But nothing disgusted them so much as the trophies.
' Supposing* there were images under the arms, they were

* enraged at the sight of them, it being contrary to our law

* to worship any images.

* Herod knew very well how much they were provoked,
4 but did not think it a proper opportunity to use violence ;
' wherefore he endeavoured to appease them by fair words ;

* but in vain. For with one consent they cried out, that
' they would suffer any extremity, rather than have images

* of men in their city. Whereupon, Herod took some of

* their chief men into the theatre : and having ordered the

* ornaments to be taken off. when nothing appeared under-
' neatli but a naked piece of wood, the company smiled at
' the mistake.

' The people seemed upon this to be brought into a better
' temper. But yet some there were, who still retained the

* offence they had taken at these practices : and esteeming
' the alteration of their laws to be the beginning of all man-
' ncr of evils, thought it their duty to run any hazard, rather
' than seem to connive at Herod, who was forcibly intro-
' ducing things contrary to their customs ; and who, whilst
' he had the name of king, was in fact the enemy of the
' whole nation. Ten men therefore of the city, binding

* themselves by an oath to run all hazards together, armed
' themselves with short daggers, which they hid under their
' clothes. And there was a blind man, who, being exceed-
' ingly moved at the reports he had heard, offered himself,

* and took the same oath with them. Not that he could

* give them any assistance, but he was resolved to suffer
' with them, if any accident befel them. And the zeal of
' this man added not a little to their resolution.'

Josephus goes on to relate, that they entered into the
theatre, expecting Herod's arrival ; resolved, if possible, to
kill Herod himself, or, if they failed of that, a good number

Jewish Opinions and Practices. 227

of his attendants. But one of Herod's spies getting intelli
gence of the design, prevented his going to the theatre.
Being seized, they remitted nothing of their firmness ; they
did not so much as attempt to * deny their intention ; but

* produced the swords they had under their clothes, and
' professed that the conspiracy they had entered into, was

* laudable and pious, and that they had not entered into it
6 for private profit, or any other particular interest, but for
< what was much more valuable, the ancient customs of their

* nation ; which it was fit that all should see observed, or

* die in the defence of1 them/

This conspiracy against Herod himself, with all the cir
cumstances here mentioned, must needs satisfy all men,
there is nothing improbable in the facts of this kind related
by St. Luke. According to all accounts, this mad and
furious zeal was not altogether so much in vogue, or at so
great a height, in Herod's time, as it was afterwards.

X. As Judea was a Roman province, during the time of
our Saviour's ministry, so there appear, in the history the
evangelists have given us, many tokens of the uneasiness
which this circumstance gave the Jewish nation.

The asking Jesus that question, " Is it lawful for us to
give tribute to Caesar or not?" is represented as a very
subtle artifice to ensnare him, Matt. xxii. 17; Mark xii. 14;
Luke xx. 21, 22. There can be no doubt, but it would
have been judged an offence against the government they
were subject to, to say it was not lawful ; and it must have
been unpopular among the Jews to affirm it was : for other
wise there would have been no extraordinary subtilty in
this contrivance, which yet it is plainly intimated there
was.

Moreover, a publican appears to have been a very odious
and ignominious character. They are usually reckoned
with harlots and sinners.

When our Lord went into the house of Zaccheus, this
being done in the view of a great crowd of spectators, it is
said, Luke xix. 7, that " all they who saw it, murmured,
saying*, that he was gone to be guest with a man that is a
sinner/' They were surprised, and even offended, that
Jesus, whom they seemed then to have considered as a pro
phet, should make a visit to a man of that character ; when
they themselves, it is likely, disdained to have any conver
sation with him.

KO.I <rvv t

oiKtuov IVIKO. TtaQuv TO Sf. irXeov virep TU>V KOIVWV
a icai Traviv v\ ^vXamiv r\ $vr)<JKf.iv Trpo avrwv a^iov. Ant. 1. XV. C. 8. sect. 1—4.

Q 2

228 Credibility of the Gospel History.

It is certain, the paying taxes to the Romans was at this
time a very heavy affliction to the Jewish nation. When
Josephus gives the history of the census or enrolment of
their estates by Cyrenius, after Archelaus was deposed by
Augustus, and had been banished into Gaul, he says, ' that
' the Jews were at first surprised at the name of a census,
' but that by the persuasion of Joazar the high priest, they

* generally acquiesced in it. However, Judas Gaulanites,

* associating to himself Sadduc a pharisee, excited the peo-
' pie to rebellion ; told them that an assessment would in-

* troduce downright slavery, and persuaded them to assert
4 their liberty. The people heard their discourses with incre-
' dible pleasure. And it is impossible to represent the evils
' the nation has suffered, which were owing to these men.
' For Judas and Sadduc brought in amongst us this fourth

* sect ; and there being many who embraced their notions,
' they not only caused disturbances in the government at
' that time, but laid the foundation of those evils that fol-
6 lowed ; which indeed are owing to this principle, till then

* unknown.' *

He then delivers the character and principles of the three
chief and more ancient sects of the Jews, (as he calls
them,) the pharisees, the sadducees, and the1 essenes. And
afterwards returns again to the men he had been speaking
of before. ' Judas the Galilean was the leader of the fourth
' sect. In all other points they hold the same sentiments
6 with the pharisees. But they have an invincible affection
' for liberty, and acknowledge God alone their Lord and

* Governor. From this time the nation became infected
' with this distemper : and Gessius Florus, by abusing his
' power when he was president, threw them into despair,
' and provoked them to rebel against the Romans.' m

What is here transcribed from Josephus is enough to con
vince us, that the paying tribute to the Romans must have
been- very grievous to the Jews, and that they who collected
it for them, must have been scorned and abhorred by the
people : for he says, that Judas's and Sadduc's speeches
were heard by them with incredible pleasure ; that their
principle had caused many great evils to the nation, and
that it was one ground of the war with the Romans. But I
must make two or three remarks. Josephus calls this a
principle till then unknown to them. But thisn is not ex
actly true without some limitation. There was an oath of

k Ant. lib. xviii. c. 1. sect. 1. ' Ibid. sect. 2, 3, 4, 5.

m Ibid. sect. 6. n TOJ aavvnOei TTOOTIOOV <bi\oao<j)ia£ Toiaadt'

p. 792. 37.

Jewish Opinions and Practices. 229

fidelity to Augustus and Herod tendered to the Jewish na

tion, at the latter end of Herod's reign. But there were

above six thousand pharisees,0 who refused at that time to

take it. Joseph us says, that at the persuasion of Joazer the

high priest the nation generally acquiesced. Doubtless,

the Romans carried their point, but yet a very deep grudge

remained in the minds of the Jewish people. And the ser

vice which Joazer had done the Romans upon this occasion,

rendered him so unpopular, that it cost him the priesthood.

These are the very words of Josephus : ' Cyrenius having

made a seizure of Archelaus's effects, and finished the

census in the thirty-seventh year after the victory at Ac-

tium, constituted Ananus the son of Seth high priest,

having taken away that dignity and honour from the high

priest Joazer; who was overpowered by the seditions and

tumults of the multitude/ P or, in other worlds, who had

been mobbed by the people.

Lastly, Josephus calls Judas of Galilee the head of a
fourth sect. But, though he uses these words here, he of
tentimes makes but three sects of the Jews. And I think
that the sect of the pharisees must generally have held the
same notion, which he ascribes to Judas. The six thou
sand, who refused to take the oath above mentioned, were
pharisees. Josephus owns, that Judas's followers differed
from the pharisees in nothing else, but this one principle of
an excessive fondness for liberty. He expressly calls Sad-
due, who joined with Judas, a pharisee. And I would fain
know what sect Judas had been of before. If he had been
of the sect of the sadducees or essenes, Josephus would
have said so. The case seems to me to have been thus :
Judas and they that held his principles were generally of
the sect of the pharisees, but they were not pharisees ; be
cause this title was more peculiarly appropriated to those,
who had some distinction for their learning, riches, posts,
employments ; or to those who had a great deal of leisure,
and little else to do, but to make an uncommon show of
devotion and sanctity. Thus, I suppose, the pharisees in
general had this principle, but the common people only
avowed it. Josephus had a difficult task : he was con
cerned to save the honour of the supreme parts of the Ro
man government, and of the chief men of the Jewish nation,
and particularly of those properly called pharisees, of
whom he was one ; and to throw the blame of the war, and

0 Ant. lib. xvii. p. 753. 41. P Iwa£apov TQV apx'tofa

ramaaQtvTa VTTO TI\£ 7r\t)0vog a<f>t\o[jitvo£ TO a£ia>/ja TH]Q Tiprjg, Avavov Toy
S«0' i=ra ap^itpea. Ant. 1. xviii. cap. 2. in.

230 Credibility of the Gospel Histonj.

all their sufferings, upon the cruelty and avarice of Albi-
nus and Gessius Florus, the two last Roman procurators,
and the common people among the Jews and their leaders.
This part he has acted very finely. But I think, that if the
pharisees had controlled this principle sincerely, they might
have suppressed it. For a proof of this, I refer the reader
to the chapter of the Jewish sects, where the power of the
pharisees appears very evident. I shall here add only one
passage more from Josephus. ' And on the account of
' these, [principles,] they [the pharisees] are in great au-

* thority with the people ; and all parts of divine worship,

* whether prayers or sacrifices, are performed according to
' their interpretations. This testimony have the cities given
' to their virtue, because of their following in all things that
' which is best, both in their words and actions.' 1

XI. But though the Roman tribute was a heavy griev
ance, and they who collected it were much hated, yet it is
evident that many Jews were employed in this work. The
publicans mentioned in the gospels must have been of the
Jewish nation. " Then came also the publicans to be bap
tized, and said unto him, [John,] Master, what shall we do ?"
Luke iii. 12. See Matt. xxi. 31, 32. It appears likewise,
that some of the publicans in Judea were honest persons,
and men of substance. Such an one was Levi, or Matthew.
" And Levi made him a great feast in his own house : and
there was a great company of publicans and of others that
sat down with them," Luke v. 29. See Matt. ix. 10, Mark
ii. 14. Nor is there any hint of any unjust practices, which
Levi had been guilty of in the post he had enjoyed. And
from the great openness and impartiality with which the
evangelists have written their history, it is reasonable to
conclude, there was no exception against Matthew's cha
racter, beside his employment ; which, undoubtedly, was
not reputable. Zaccheus, when he entertained Jesus, was
certainly a thorough convert to virtue ; and I think, he
could not have been a very wicked man before. " And
Zaccheus stood and said, Behold, Lord, the half of my goods
I give to the poor ; and if I have taken any thing" from any
man by false accusation, I restore him four-fold," Luke
xix. 8. According to his computation, he supposed him
self capable of making ample restitution to all he had in
jured, out of the remaining half of his goods, and it is likely

q Km Si1 avTa TOIQ TE SijpoiG TriQavoraroi rvy^avsai, Kai oiroffa Seia
re KO.I ispwv Troi^crewf i£?7y?j(m ry tKtivwv Tvy\avsai Trpaoxrojuei'a' eif
apETijg avroiQ al TTQ\IIQ efiaprvpijaav ZTriTrjfitvaei TS STTI
ry diairy TH (3is KCII XoyoiQ. Antiq. lib. xviii. c. 1. sect. 3.

Jewish Opinions and Practices. 231

supposed he should hare somewhat left for himself. His
unjust gains, therefore, were but a small portion of his
estate.

That there were Jews who were publicans, and that some
of these were honest and wealthy men, will appear from a
story in Josephus : * There lay near the Jewish synagogue
' at Csesarea a piece of ground in the possession of a Greek

* of the same place. The Jews had often attempted to

* make a purchase of it, and had offered a great deal more
' than the intrinsic value. But the owner refused all their
' offers : and, as if he intended to affront them, began to

* build workhouses on the ground, leaving the Jews but a
' very strait and narrow passage. The warmer part of the
' people attempted to obstruct the builders. But Florus
4 not restraining these practices by his authority, the chief

* men of the Jews, among whom was John the publican, not
6 knowing well what course to take, wait upon Florus, and

* give him eight talents of silver to stop the building. That
' he might get the money into his hands, he promised all

* they desired ; but having received it, went away from

* Csesarea to Sebaste, leaving the riotous people to them-
' selves, as if the Jews had only purchased a licence to
' quarrel.' And so it happened, the Jews and Greeks at
Ccesarea had a battle, in which the former were worsted.
Upon this John with twelve of the chief of the Jews go to
Sebaste, and coming to Florus, ' make complaints to him
« concerning these proceedings, and entreat his assistance,

* modestly putting him in mind likewise of ther eight
« talents.'

This John must have been one of the most considerable
of the Jews at Csesarea, since he only is mentioned by
name. Nor is there any thing here said of him. but what is
very honourable ; unless any think fit to except against the
giving* a bribe to a bad man, to do what is in itself just and
reasonable.

There is, in the gospels, so frequent mention of publicans
who were Jews, that I have been sometime inclined to think
that the Roman tribute was collected for the most part by
Jews. The Romans might choose this method. The Jews
employed in this work became odious thereby, but the Ro
man government was relieved.

Josephus8 has made mention of several Jews who were
Roman knights. It is certain, that the Roman knights were
the great1 farmers and collectors of the Roman tribute. It

r De Bell. lib. ii. cap. 14. sect. 4, 5. s De Bell. lib. ii. cap. 14.

sect. 9. t Certe huic homini spes nulla salutis esset, si publi-

232 Credibility of the Gospel History.

seems to me, therefore, very probable, that those Jews had
merited the honour of knighthood by their good services in
some part of the revenue.

I do not pretend to be master of the Roman method of
collecting taxes, but it appears to me not unlikely, that in
most provinces the natives were employed in the towns
as the under collectors, and that the receivers general or
other superior officers only were Romans. It is plain, that
in the province of Sicily, in the time of the republic, when
a new assessment was made there, (as it was every fifth
year,) Sicilians were appointed to be the under censors."
The publicans were far from being- beloved in any pro
vince^ the Romans might therefore judge it prudent to
employ some natives in collecting taxes : and it is proba
ble, that in all places some would be found, who were
willing' to make an advantage of the subjection of their
country, and accept places under the Romans their masters.

CHAP. X.

ROMAN CUSTOMS MENTIONED IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

I. The Romans used the question. II. Examined by scourg
ing. III. Unlawful to scourge a Roman. IV. Espe
cially uncondemned. V. Lysias's power at Jerusalem.
VI. Of St. Paul's citizenship. VII. This privilege
bought with a great sum. VIII. Accusations not to be
heard in the absence of the accused person. IX. Of St.
PauVs imprisonment. X. Prisoners sent to Rome from
the provinces. XL Delivered there to the captain of the
guard.

IN the history of St. Paul, there are many Roman customs
expressly mentioned or alluded to. I shall here endeavour
to take some notice of all those we meet with, from the time
of his being apprehended at Jerusalem to his confinement
at Rome ; excepting only those, which have been already

cani, hoc est, si equites Romani, judicarent. Cic. in Verr. lib. iii. cap. 62.
n. 168. u Cic. in Verr. lib. ii. cap. 53. n. 131. et seq.

v Sic porro nostros homines diligunt, uthis SOLIS neque publicanus neque
negotiator odio sit. Ibid. cap. 3. n. 7.

Roman Customs mentioned in the New Testament. 233

observed in the chapter of the State of the Jews in Ju-
dea.

When Lysias, the chief captain, had rescued Paul out of
the hands of the Jewish multitude, " he commanded him to
be brought into the castle, and bade that he should be ex
amined by scourging1, that he might know wherefore they
cried so against him. And as they bound him with thongs,
Paul said unto the centurion that stood by, Is it lawful for
you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned ?"
Acts xxii. 24, 25.

Three or four things are here implied : that it was cus
tomary for the Romans to use the question or torture, for
the discovery of crimes ; that this was sometimes done by
beating or whipping ; that it was unlawful to scourge a
Roman, especially uncondemned.

I. It was customary for the Romans to make use of the
question for the discovery of crimes. There are many in
stances of it about this time, in the history of the Rotnana
emperors. Nor had the Jews any particular reason to corn-
plain of the Romans' putting this in practice in their country,
provided it was not done when there were no grounds of
suspicion, since Herod the Great had openly practised it
there b before.

II. This was sometimes done by whipping or beating.
There were several ways of examining persons, some were
used to citizens or freemen, others were reckoned0 servile.
But that scourging was practised in this case, is evident
from an example I give of it from Tacitus in the reign ofd
Nero. Epicaris, a woman, among other tortures was so
examined. And it is observable that she was not then a
slave. There are other instances ine Grotius. It is likely
that a stick wasf made use of in examining a citizen, rods
for others.

a Nihil enim exprimi quaestione potuit, Suet, in Vit. August. 19. Diversi
interrogantur. — Turn exorta suspicio, quia non congruentia responderant : in-
ditaque vincla. Et tormentorum aspectum ac minas non tulere. Tacit. Ann.
15, 56, ct passim. b Antiq. lib. xvi. cap. 10. sect. 2—5.

c Et. Q. Gallium praetorem — servilem in modum torsit : ac fatentem nihil,
jussit occidi. Sueton. Aug. c. 27. d Atque interim

Nero recordatus Volusii Proculi indicio Epicharim attineri, ratusque muliebre
corpus impar dolori, tormentis dilacerari jubet. At illam non verbera,
non ignes, non ira eo acrius torquentium ne a femina spernerentur, pervicere
quin objecta denegaret — clariore exemplo libertina mulier — cum ingenui et
viri et equites Romani senatoresque, intacti tormentis, carissima suorum quis-
que pignorum proderent. Ann. xv. c. 57.

e Ad. Matt. c. xxvii. 19. f Nullam existimationis

infamiam avunculus tuus pertimescat ictibus fustium subjectus ob crimen
quaestione habita. L. Nullam. c. ap. Grot. ibid.

234 Credibility of the Gospel History.

III. Thirdly, It is intimated, that it was unlawful to
scourge a Roman : which thing- is also taken notice of in
the account of the treatment of Paul and Silas at Philippi,
Acts xvi. 22 — 37. Cicero says, it was a crime to bind or
whip a Roman % citizen. It is one of his charges against
Verres, that he had openly whipped a Roman at Messina
who had claimed the privilege of the city, and when they
were going to inflict this punishment upon him, cried out
to the officers ; (much after the same manner that Paul is
said to have done ;) I am a Roman citizen.11 Here again
it is to be observed, that a citizen of Rome, if he had com
mitted a fault that deserved it, might be beaten with a stick,
but might not be whipped with rods.5

IV. But it was more especially unlawful to punish a
man uncondemned, or before he had been convicted. This
the magistrates at Philippi did, but they soon repented of
it. It is said to have been one of the laws ofk the twelve
tables, that no man should be put to death before he had
been tried. According to1 Dionysius, this was a law among
the Romans long before the twelve tables were composed.
Indeed I think, it must be a law with all people who have
any sense of justice or equity. Cicero lays it down as an
undoubted maxim, that no sentence of condemnation ought
to be pronounced before a cause had been heard.™

V. From Lysias's order to examine St. Paul, and from
other things done by him at Jerusalem, it may be inferred
that he had there some sort of jurisdiction. It appears
from a passage alleged by me above" from Marcianus, that
it was usual for presidents of provinces to delegate part of

« Facinus est vinciri civem "Romanum, scelus verberari. In Verr. 1. v. n.
170. h Caedebatur virgis in medio foro Messanae civis

Romanus, judices j cum interea nullus gemitus, nulla vox alia istius miseri,
inter dolorem crepitumque plagarum audiebatur, nisi haec, civis Romanus
sum. Hac se commeraoratione civitatis omnia verbera depulsurum crucia-
tumque a corpore dejecturum arbitrabatur. Ibid. n. 162. O nomen dulce
libertatis ! O jus eximium nostrae civitatis ! O lex Porcia, legesque Semproniae !

Huccine tandem omnia reciderunt, ut civis Romanus, in provincia populi

Romani, deligatus in foro virgis caederetur ? n. 163. Oblitosne igitur hos
putatis esse, quemadmodum sit iste solitus virgis plebem Romanam concidere ?
In Verr. lib. i. n. 122. ' Ex quibus causis liber fustibus

caeditur, ex his servus flagillis caedi. Lib. x. in pr. ff. de poenis.

k luterrici indemnatum quemcunque hominem, etiam xii. tabularum de-
crcta vetuerant. Haec Salvianus episcopus Massiliensis de judicio et provi-
dentia. Fragment, xii. Tab. Tit. 27. sect. 1.

1 TSQ vofisQ TrapE^o/Lttvoi TSQ SK twvTaQ aicpiTOv cnroKTtivtiv udeva. Antiq.
Rom. lib. hi. cap. 22. p. 153. v. 7.

m Nam, causa cognita, multi possunt absolvi; incognita quidem condemnari
nemo potent. In Verr. lib. i. n. 25.

n P. 77. note f.

Roman Customs mentioned in the New Testament. 235

their power and authority to under officers. For this rea
son Cicero advises his brother, then president of Asia, not
only to observe himself the rules of justice, but to have a
strict eye upon all the0 ministers of his government, and to
be very circumspect in the choice of persons to whom he
committed any? power. And it appears from a passage of
Josephus already q transcribed, that there were at Caesarea
officers under Felix who had the power of whipping of
fenders.

1 have in answer to Tertullus's accusation given Lysiasr
a great character. But perhaps some may think, that this
order for examining St. Paul by scourging* is unjustifiable.
They may be of opinion, that here were not sufficient
grounds of suspicion to put him to the question. To this I
say : If I should here abandon Lysias, my apology for him
will in some respect be strengthened by it. If Lysias here
strained a point in complaisance to the Jewish multitude,
and bore too hard upon his prisoner, Tertullus's complaints
will appear the more unreasonable. But I am still inclined
to think that Lysias acted honestly herein. Paul was a
stranger to him, and he could not but pay some regard to
the vehement and general clamour of the people of the city
in which he resided, and which was the metropolis of the

Erovince. Any man in the same case with Lysias would
avc been apt to conclude, that Paul must have committed
some offence or other when " they cried so against him."
The method of inquiry he had appointed was not fit to be
practised upon a Roman ; but Lysias did not then know
that Paul was a Roman. In other respects it must have
been unexceptionable ; for I cannot but think, it was a
more gentle way of examining than some others then in
use.

VI. After St. Paul had been beaten at Philippi, he com
plained of the injustice done him because he was a Roman.
As they were binding him at Jerusalem, he claimed the
privilege as a Roman citizen, and it was granted him ; for
it follows : " When the centurion henrd that, he went and
told the chief captain, saying, Take heed what thou dost,
for this man is a Roman. Then the chief captain came,
and said unto him ; Tell me, art thou a Roman ? He said,

0 Nequaquam satis esse, ipsum hasce habere virtutes, sed esse circumspicien-
dum diligenter, ut in hac custodia provinciae non te unum, sed omnes minis-
tros imperii tui, sociis, et civibus et reipublicae praestare videare. Ad. Quint.
Fratr. lib. i. cap. 3. P Sed si quis est, in quo jam offenderis, do

quo aliquid senseris ; huic nihil credideris, nullam partem existimationis tuae
commisseris. Ibid. cap. 4. ' P. 184. r P. 73.

236 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Yea. And the chief captain answered, With a great sum
obtained I this freedom. And Paul said, But I was free
born. Then straightway they departed from him which
should have examined him : and the chief captain also was
afraid after he knew that he was a Roman, and because he
had bound him," Acts xxii. 26—29.

St. Paul therefore does expressly affirm that he was a
Roman. Nor ought it to be thought strange that a Jew
should be a citizen of Rome. There were many such in
stances about this time. Julius Csesar bestowed the free
dom of the city upon Antipater,s the father of Herod the
Great, in consideration of services he had done him. Philo
says that there w^ere a great number of Jews in Augustus's
time at Rome, who had been taken captives and carried
thither, and who had obtained their freedom from their
masters.1 Josephus complains loudly, as well as very
justly, of Florus the last procurator of Judea, * That he had
' been guilty of an unheard of cruelty, and what had never

* been done before, when he whipped before his tribunal,
' and crucified, men of the equestrian rank. For, says he,

* though their extraction was Jewish, their quality" was
6 Roman.' And our historian Josephus, who was a Jewish
priest, received the freedom of the city from Vespasian after
the war was finished, as he has assured us himself. v

But though there is no improbability but that St. Paul
might be a feoman citizen, yet it has been a question how
he came by this privilege. Some learned w men are of
opinion that Tarsus was a Roman colony, and that St. Paul
was therefore a citizen of Rome by virtue of his nativity at
Tarsus. But it will be worth our while to take a view of
St. Luke's account of this matter. Lysias took Paul out of
the hands of the Jews. " And as Paul was to be led into
the castle, he said unto the chief captain, May I speak unto
thee ? Who said, Canst thou speak Greek ? Art thou not
that Egyptian — ? But Paul said, 1 am a man which am a
Jew of Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, a citizen of no mean city :
and I beseech thee, suffer me to speak unto the people."
Acts xxi. 37 — 39. In his speech, St. Paul tells the Jews,
" I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city
in Cilicia," chap. xxii. 3.

s UoXtTttg. rt avrov ry 'Pw/iaiwv erifirifrev. Joseph, de Bell. lib. i. p. 978. v.
29. l De Legat. p. 1014. C. E.

u 'Qv ei KCII TO ycvog Is&ziwr, aXXa TO ysv a£iwjwa 'Pw/ia'ucoj' rjv. Jos. de
Bell. lib. ii. cap. 14. fin. v De Vita, p. 945. 28.

w. Baim. Ann. A. 58. n. 147, 148. Hamm. ad Acts xxii. 27. Tillemont
Memoi^ Ecclesi. Witsius de Vita Pauli, sect. 1. n. 6.

Roman Customs mentioned in the New Testament. 237

When the people had interrupted Paul's speech, " the
chief captain commanded him to be brought into the castle,
and bade that he should be examined by scourging," ch.
xxii. 23, 24. The chief captain therefore did not suspect
as yet that Paul was a citizen of Rome, though he had been
told by Paul he was of Tarsus. St. Paul had also said the
same thing at the beginning of his speech to the Jews : but
I do not insist upon that ; for though it is likely the chief
captain stood by, I suppose he did not understand Paul, his
speech being made in the Hebrew tongue.

It cannot be said, that the chief captain bade that he
should be examined with scourging, though he knew Paul
to be a Roman : because Lysias does not appear to be one
of those fierce officers, that have no regard to laws. Quite
the contrary : as soon as Paul had claimed his privilege,
" then straightway they departed from him which should
have examined him : and the chief captain also was afraid
after he knew that he was a Roman, and because he had
bound him."

" Then the chief captain came and said unto him : Tell
me, art thou a Roman ? He said, Yea." If Tarsus had been
a town of Roman citizens, St. Paul having before told the
chief captain that he was of Tarsus, the question now put
would not have been, Art thou a Roman ? but, Art thou
really of Tarsus ?

The sequel of this discourse affords more proof. " The
chief captain answered, With a great sum obtained I this
freedom." Lysias having purchased this privilege with a
great sum, and observing nothing considerable in Paul's
person or mien, and supposing therefore that he had no
money to spare, he still makes a doubt of the truth of his
claim. This answer of Lysias had been altogether imper
tinent, if Tarsus had been a town of Roman citizens. " And
Paul said, But I was free born :" a plain indication that it
was a privilege derived to him from his parents. And on
this account the opposition between the chief captain's pur
chase and Paul's free birth is strong arid beautiful. If
Paul's freedom had been owing to his nativity in any place,
the place would certainly have been mentioned in this con
ference between him and Lysias.

And it is observable, that St. Luke has often mentioned
Tarsus, but never calls it a colony or municipium, as he
would have done in all probability if it had been so. tJpon
the whole I think it very plain, that St. Luke does not sup
pose Paul to have been a Roman by virtue of his bith at

T. » '» •

arsus.

it

'» •

238 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Let us now consider the external evidence, and inquire
what privileges the Roman or Greek authors ascribe to
Tarsus. Strabo says, the people of Tarsus were much given
to the study of philosophy, and all other parts of polite
literature : ' That Tarsus was very populous, and reckoned
' the metropolis of the country ;'x but he no where says it
was a colony or municipium. It has been thought by some,
that Augustus conferred upon them the honour of the
citizenship of Rome, beside other privileges, as a reward
for their attachment to the interest of Julius Caesar, and as
a recompense for the hardships they suffered from? Cassius.
But there is no proof of this. None of the authors who
have mentioned these matters say any thing of the citizen
ship. Appian says, ' that Mark Antony gave liberty and

* immunity from taxes to Laodicea and Tarsus, and ordered
( by a special decree, that all citizens of Tarsus, that had

* been taken captive and sold for slaves,2 should be yet set

* at liberty.' Lucian says, ' that at the request of Atheno-
' dorus of Tarsus, the stoic philosopher, and preceptor of
' Augustus, the city of Tarsus obtained freedom from tri-

* bute.'a Pliny callsb Tarsus a free city : which is an in
contestable proof it was not a Roman colony, for then he
would have called it so. When Ammianus Marcellinusc
mentions Tarsus, he speaks of it only as a considerable city
of Cilicia. Ulpian says there were two colonies in Cilicia;
but Tarsus is not one of those which he mentions/

Tillemont6 refers to Baron Spanheim's Treatise of Medals,
as the source of the proofs he brings for the citizenship of
Tarsus. But though the Baron did then suppose Tarsus
had this privilege, yet, I think, the arguments he uses are
no proof of it, as he himself was satisfied f afterwards. The

x ToffavTT] de roig tvQatit. avOpioiroig cnrsdr) Trpog re 0iXoffo0iav, feat rt]v aX-

\r\v ejKVK\iov airaaav Traifoiav, ytyovtv fcai T aXXa T tvctvBpti, Kai TrXtia-

TOV fiuvciTat, TOV Tijg fj,r)Tp07TO\t(i)£ fTT^gcTa Xoyov. Lib. xiv. p. 991. A. B.

y Vid Tillemont. Memoires Ecclesiastiques : St. Paul, Article premier.

z AaoSuctae de icat Tape-fag eXevOepsg ijtytsi icai arcXag 0opwv, Kai Tapfftwv
TSQ 7T67rpa/i£V8c aTTfXve Tr]g dsXuas ^taray/iart. Appian. de Bell. Civ. 1. v.
p. 1077. ed. Amstel. Oct. 1670.

a AOrjvodwpog, Tapfftvg , TwiKog, 6g Kai dtSaffKaXog sytvtro Katcrapog S£/3a«T8
S-ts, i»0' ov rj TapcTtwv TroXtg »cai <}>opwv iK*<piaQi}y K. 'X. Vol. ii. edit. Amst. p.
473. Macrob. b Cydnus Tarsum, liberam urbem, procul

a mari secans. Plin. 1. v. c. 27. in.

c Ciliciam vero Tarsus nobilitat, urbs perspicabilis. L. xiv. c. 8.

d Est et in Bithynia (colonia) Apamena, et in Ponto Sinopensis. Est et in
Cilicia Selinus et Trajanopolis. L. i. sect. 10, 11. ff. de censibus.

e Ubi supra. f See his Orbis Romanus. p. 141, &c. The

edition which Mr. Tillemont refers to of Spanheim, de Prastantia, &c. is the
quarto edit. Amst. 1671. His Orbis Romanus was published at London,
1703.

Roman Customs mentioned in the New Testament. 239

only proof he then had of it was a medal of Gordian, in
which £ Tarsus is styled a colony, and a free city. But
though it were a colony then, it is no evidence that it was
so when St. Paul was born ; or that it was made a colony
by Augustus. And after all, the medal on which Spanheim
relied, does not style Tarsus a colony, but only a free city,
as he found afterwards.11

Upon the whole, therefore, St. Luke's account is fully
confirmed by the best authorities. Tarsus was no " mean
city," but it was not a municipium, or town of Roman
citizens.

Possibly some may inquire, if St. Paul was not a Roman
citizen, or entitled to some other peculiar privileges, by his
being* born at Tarsus, to what purpose did he make any
mention of it? I answer, every one in St. Paul's circum
stances is naturally led to mention the place of his nativity
or residence, especially when he is asked who he is. But
St. Paul's innocence did not depend upon his being* a Ro
man, but a Jew : and therefore this last, together with the
place of his birth, is what he here mentions. The outcry,
when St. Paul was seized, was, " Men of Israel, help, this
is the man that teacheth all men every where against the
people ; — And farther brought Greeks also into the temple,

and hath polluted this holy place. And all the city was

moved, and the people ran together ; and they took Paul,
and drew him out of the temple ; and forthwith the doors
were shut," Acts xxi. 28—30.

The Jews which were of Asia, who began the disturbance,
knew well enough that Paul was a Jew; but the cry being,
that the " temple had been polluted," and Paul being taken
by them, and drawn out of the temple, it is likely, a great
part of the multitude thought St. Paul had been a gentile,
who had gone beyond the bounds prescribed to such :
which when any one but a Jew had done, he was liable to
the heaviest punishment. Therefore, when the chief cap
tain asked him who he was, he told him he was a Jew of
Tarsus ; which was enough to satisfy him, the Jews had no

s lis vero liberse Ciliciae locis adscribenda caput ejusdem provinciae Tarsus,
juxta insignem Gordiani nuramum (in Cimel. Reg. Gall.) KOA. EAEY9.
TAPC. qui insuper Romanam coloniam eandem extitisse arguit. Span, de
Proest. p. 785. h Ipsum vero EAEY0EPAS seu liberae
nomen, quod eidem largitur Plinius (Lib. v. c. 27.) huic Ciliciae metropoli in
antiquo Regiae Gallorum Gazae (Specim. Morell. Tab. iv.) nummo sub Cara-
calla percusso tribuitur j non vero, quod Cl. Patini fide olim credideram, Co-
loniae itidem appellatio. Immo, ut dies diem docet, et si Romana colonia sub
primis Caesaribus, quod de ea nuspiam legitur, evasisset eadem Tarsus ; baud
ideo oppidum civium Romanorum extitisset. Spanh. Orb* Rom. p. 141 .

240 Credibility of the Gospel History.

right to use him as they did, for going into the temple.
And it is observable, that immediately upon St. Paul's be
ginning to speak : " Men, brethren, and fathers, hear ye
my defence ; when they heard that he spake in the Hebrew
tongue to them, they kept the more silence." This for the
present allayed the heat, because it was a strong presump
tion, that he was not a Gentile.

St. Paul therefore had no reason, at this time, to tell them
he was a Roman citizen ; but it was of the last importance,
to assure both the chief captain and the multitude that he
was a Jew.

St. Luke has not informed us, how St. Paul's citizenship
was derived to him. He was " free born :" but what was
the original of this privilege does not appear. It seems to
me, however, not unlikely, that some of St. Paul's ances
tors had obtained it for services they had done the Roman
commonwealth in1 the wars. The Jews had formerly served
the kings of Syria in their armies, and afterwards the Ro
mans. But they had been long since discharged from that
service, upon the account of some religious scruples which
they had. There are in Josephus the copies of these dis
charges given them at Ephesus, Del us, and other places.
One of these discharges runs thus : ' Lucius k Lentulus the

* consul declared, " I have dismissed from the service the

* Jewish Roman citizens, who observe the rites of the Jew-
' ish religion at Ephesus." Again the decree of the De-
lians is thus : ' Baeotus being archon, the order of the prae

tors. Marcus Piso the ambassador, who was also the offi
cer appointed to raise soldiers, being in our city, having
called together us, and a sufficient number of other citizens,
gave orders, that if there were any Jewish Roman citizens,
no man should disturb any of them on the account of
military service ; for as much as Cornelius Lentulus, the
consul, had dismissed the Jews from the military service

6 on account of their religion.'1

This may give ground to suppose, that a good number of

Jews, who served the Romans in auxiliary armies, had ob

tained the freedom of the city. But whether any of St.

Paul's ancestors deserved it in this, or some other way, I do

not determine, nor is it necessary we should.

VII. We have sufficiently considered St. Paul's citizen

ship. We must not, however, pass by what the chief

' Vid. Grot, ad Act. xxii. 28. k AWKIOQ fa

enrW Ho\iTa£ 'P(>}fiant)v ladaisf, Upa ladaitca £%ovrag mi Troiavra^ ev
TTjOO TS flrjftaTOc; fcicridai/joviae kvtKa <rpamaf enrtXvffa. Antiq. 1. xiv.
c. 10. sect. 13. l Ibid. sect. 14.

Roman Customs mentioned in the JVeu; Testament. 241

captain said to him : " With a great sum obtained I this
freedom." It was often given to men and cities as a re
ward™ of some special merit or services : but that it was
also boug'ht, and that at a great price, appears from a pas
sage of Dio, which I leave with the reader. ' He [Clau-
' dius] took away the freedom of the city from many who

* were unworthy of it, arjd he gave it without any reason to
4 others ; sometimes to single persons, at other times to

* great numbers together. For Romans having the prefer-

* ence above strangers, there were many who begged the

* citizenship of the emperor ; and others who bought it of

* Messalina, or the freed-men. By which means this privi-

* lege, which had been bought formerly at a great price,
' became so cheap, that merry people would say, a man
' might be made a Roman citizen for a few pieces of broken

* glass.' n

VIII. We have already had occasion to observe the jus
tice of the Roman laws, in forbidding to punish any man,
till he had been tried and convicted. We have something
farther observable in the conduct of Felix and Festus, who
refused to give Paul's cause a hearing, unless both parties,
namely St. Paul and his accusers, were present. Lysias
sent Paul under a strong guard from Jerusalem to Ca?sarea.
" Who when they came to CaBsarea, and delivered the
epistle to the governor, [Felix,] presented Paul also before
him. And when the governor had read the letter, he asked
of what province he was. And when he understood that
he was of Cilicia : I will hear thee, said he, when thine ac
cusers also are come," Acts xxiii. 33—35; xxiv. 7, 8.
When the Jews at Jerusalem " desired favour of Festus
against Paul, Festus answered, that Paul should be kept at
Csesarea, amd that he himself would depart shortly thither.
Let them therefore, said he, which among you are able, go
down with me, and accuse this man, if there be any wicked
ness in him," ch. xxv. 4, 5. This is somewhat more particu
larly related, when " Festus declared Paul's cause unto the
king, [Agrippa,] saying, There is a certain man left in
bonds by Felix. About whom, when I was at Jerusalem,

n) Eoque Romana civitas olim data, cum id rarum, nee nisi virtuti pretium
esset. Tacit. Ann. lib. iii. c. 40.

n "Svyvag ds f>ij KCII a\\ag avafy&Q rr/f TroXtrciaf cnrrjXaae, KCII irtpoic; avrr]v
Kai TTavv avaidijv, TOIQ \atv KCIT avfipa, TQIQ Se KCII aOpooig, fdiSs' fTreiSav yap
sv Traaiv, b)Q array, 01 'Pw/iatoi TO)V Z,tv(*)v TrpotrtTifjirjvTO, TroXXoi avrrjv Trapa
re tKtivs avTs yravro, KO.I Trapa Ti}Q MtffaaXivrjg rwv re Kaiffapeiwv WVBTO'
Kai dia T8ro jweyaXwj/ TO irpwrov xpjjjuarwv TrpaOtiaa, tiru& ovrug VTTO Trjg
eTrtvu)vr]Or), WTE /cat XoyoTroiriOijvat, on KO.V va\iva TIQ ffKtvri avvTf.-*

fjifieva dy TIVI, 7roXtr»je e<rat. Dio. 1. lx. p. 676. C. D.
VOL. I. R

242 Credibility of the Gospel History.

the chief priests and the elders of the Jews informed mo,
desiring1 to have judgment against him. To whom I an
swered, It is not the custom of the Romans, to deliver any
man to die, before that he which is accused have the ac
cusers face to face, and have licence to. answer for himself
concerning1 the crime laid against him," ver. 14 — 16.

Cicero, in his orations against Verres, the infamous prae
tor of Sicily, continually represents these as the most illegal
and inhuman proceedings, that he received accusations
against men when they were absent, and condemned0 them
without a hearing. And Tertullian makes mention of a
Roman president, who when a Christian was sent to him
with a libel, perceiving there had been some unfair dealing
tore the libel to pieces, and said, he should not act contrary
to law, and hear a man without? his accuser.

IX. We will now proceed to St. Paul's imprisonment. I
have deferred it till now, that we might take in at once the
whole account of this matter, from his being taken into cus
tody at Jerusalem, to his two years' confinement at Rome.

When Lysias heard that all Jerusalem was in an uproar,
he " immediately took soldiers, and ran down to them, and
when they saw him, they left beating Paul. Then the chief
captain came near, and took him, and commanded him to
be bound with two chains," Acts xxi. 32, 33. " On the
morrow, because he would know the certainty, wherefore
he was accused of the Jews, he loosed him from his bands,
and commanded the chief priests, and alt their council, to
appear : and brought Paul down, and set him before them,"
en. xxii. 30. St. Paul was removed from Jerusalem to
Csesarea, and " Felix commanded him to be kept in Herod's
judgment-hall." The chief priests and others went down
thither, and accused him before Felix. After this hearing,
" He [Felix] commanded a centurion to keep Paul, and to
let him have liberty, and that he should forbid none of his
acquaintance to minister, or come unto him. But after two
years, Porcius Festus came into Felix's room : and Felix
being willing" to show the Jews a pleasure, left Paul bound,"

0 Iste non dubitat jubere nomen deferri : et turn primum opinor istum ab-
sentis nomen recepisse. Res clara Sicilia tota, propter cselati argenti cupidi-
tatem reos fieri rerum capitalium ; neque solum reos fieri, sed etiam absentes.
In Verr. lib. iv. c. 40, 41. Deinde crimen sine accusatione, sententia sine
consilio, damnatio sine defensione. Lib. v. n. 23. Sed quid ego hospitii

jura in hac tarn immani bellua commemoro ? qui Sthenium absentem in

reos retulerit, causa indicta, capite damnavit. Ibid. n. 109.

P Pudens etiam missum ad se christianum, in elogio concussione ejus intel-
fecta, dimisit, scisso eodem elogio, sine accusatore negans se auditurum ho-
mmem, secundum mandatum. Ad Scapulam. c. 4.

Roman Customs mentioned in the JVew Testament. 243

ch. xxiv. 23—27. King- Agrippa having said to Paul,
" Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian ; Paul said,
I would to God that not only thou, but also all that hear
me this day, were both almost, and altogether such as I am,
except these bonds," ch. xxvi. 29. " And when he had
thus spoken, the king1 rose up, — and they talked between
themselves, saying, this man doth nothing worthy of death
or of bonds." After this St. Paul was carried to Italy,
" and when we came to Rome, the centurion delivered the
prisoners to the captain of the guard : but Paul was suf
fered to dwell by himself with a soldier that kept him,"
ch. xxviii. 16. " After three days Paul called the chief of
the Jews together. And he said unto them,— For the hope
of Israel I am bound with this chain," ver. 20. — " And
when they had appointed him a day, there came many to
him into his lodging," ver. 23. " And Paul dwelt two
whole years in his own hired house, and received all that
came in unto him, preaching the kingdom of God, and
teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ
with all confidence, no man forbidding him," ver. 30, 31.
St. Paul makes mention of his bonds in several of his epis
tles ; but those places I need not transcribe.

We have observed from Cicero, that it was unlawful to
bind, as well as to scourge a Roman citizen : and it is said,
that " the chief captain was afraid, after he knew that he
was a Roman, and because he had bound him ;" and yet St.
Paul was several years in bonds. But there is no incon-
sistence in this. A citizen might not be bound with thongs
as a punishment, or in order to be scourged : but a Roman
citizen might certainly be kept in custody, upon just sus
picions, or when there were any credible accusations
brought against him. And there was nothing at all illegal
in the way in which St. Paul was confined. There are
many instances in the Roman authors, of knights and sena
tors of Rome, who were chained in the same manner that
Paul was.^

In this history of St. Paul there is mention sometimes of
chains in the plural number, and at other times of chain in
the singular. When the chief captain " took him" from
the Jews, he " commanded1 him to be bound with two

q At Claudius, nihil ultra scrutatus, citis cum militibus, — Crispinum praetorii
praefectum misit ; a quo repertus [Valerius Asiaticus bis consul] est apud Baias,
vinclisque inditis in urbem raptus. Tacit. Ann. lib. xi. c. 1. P. Sabinum
praetorii praefectum, ob amicitiam Caecinae vinciri jubet [Vitellius.] Id.
Hist. lib. iii. c. 36. Et Julius Celsus tribunus, in vinclis laxatam catenam, et
circumdatam in diversum tendens, suam ipse cervicem perfregit. Id. Ann.
lib. vi. c. 14. r AtQtjvai aXvaeat 8vai.

R2

244 Credibility of the Gospel History.

chains," Acts xxi. 33. Whether St. Paul continued to bo
bound with two chains so long as he was kept in Judea I
cannot say ; because, though the word bands be used gene
rally afterwards in the plural number, yet the word8 is of
a general meaning, and may imply no more than confine
ment with one or more chains. However, it is certain he
was bound with but one chain whilst he was at Rome : for
it is said, that " Paul was suffered to dwell with a soldier
that kept him," ch. xxviii. 16. And he tells " the chief of
the Jews," whom he had sent for there, " that for the hope
of Israel he was1 bound with this chain." And in another
place he says, (though the text is generally thought not to
relate to this confinement,) " The Lord give mercy to the
house of Onesiphorus, for he oft refreshed me, and was not
ashamed of my cAa?w," 2 Tim. i. 16.

The way of chaining prisoners was in this manner. There
was an iron chain of a convenient length, which was fastened
at one end to the hand of the prisoner, and at the other to
the arm of the soldier. When a person was committed to
the care of one soldier, which was a very common way, and
consequently there was but one chain, the chain was fastened
to the right arm of the prisoner, and to the left arm of the
soldier. This is evident from a passage of u Seneca. It is
easy to conclude, that when a second soldier and another
chain was appointed, the prisoner must wear the other chain
on his left hand, and the soldier on his right.

It is likely, that this method of confinement obtained very
much all over the Roman empire. St. Peter was bound
thus at Jerusalem by Herod Agrippa then king of Judea.
" The same night Peter was sleeping between two soldiers,
bound with two chains, and the keepers before the door
kept the prison," Acts xii. 6.

It is observable, that when Lysias brought Paul before
the council, " that he might know wherefore he was accused
of the Jews, he loosed him from his bands," ch. xxii. 30.
But it is somewhat doubtful, whether St. Paul had not this
chain on when he appeared before Agrippa ; for he says,
" I would to God that all that hear me this day were alto
gether such as I am, except these bonds." Perhaps St.

s EXu<T£v avrov cnro rwv fooyiwv. Act. xxii. 30. IlaptKTog TWV
rsrwv. Act. xxvi. 29. l Tqv aXvaiv ravrrjv

u Aliorum aurea catena est, et laxa -- sed quid refert ? eadem custodia
universes circumdedit. Alligatique sunt etiam qui alligaverunt. Nisi tu forte
leviorem in sinistra catenam putas. Seneca de Tranquil, cap. 10. Quemad-
modum eadem catena et custodiam et militem copulat, sic ista, quse tarn dis-
sirnilia sunt, pariter incedunt. Id. Epist. 5,

Roman Customs mentioned in the JVeu> Testament. 245

Paul means no more hereby than this state of imprisonment.
I think indeed, that it was not a generous treatment of his
prisoner, nor very decent upon other accounts, for Festus
to set Paul before Agrippa and Bernice with his chains on.
However, there was a Roman of considerable quality, who
was accused, and made his defence before the senate of
Rome in the reign of Tiberius, with his chainsv upon him.

St. Paul seems to have been under a military custody.
I need not remind the reader of any particulars for a proof
of this, it runs through the whole account. There were
however several changes of the manner of his confinement.
At first he was carried into the Castle of Antonia at Jeru
salem, chained undoubtedly to a soldier or soldiers, for
that must be supposed all along, ch. xxi. 37. xxii. 24.
When he was sent to Ccesarea, " Felix commanded that he
should be kept in Herod's judg'ment-hall." ch. xxiii. 35.
But there was some alteration made, after that Felix had
heard Paul and the high priest and others that came down
from Jerusalem. " And he" [Felix] " commanded a cen
turion to keep Paul, and to let him have liberty, and that
he should forbid none of his acquaintance to minister, or
come unto him," Acts xxiv. 23. These are certainly new
orders ; the former straitness must have been hereupon
abated ; and perhaps the place of confinement was changed.
I am inclined to think, that St. Paul was now removed from
" Herod's judgment-hall " to the centurion's own habitation,
or to that part of the city where the soldiers had their quarters.

But the most gentle, easy confinement of all was that
which St. Paul had at Rome. There " he was suffered to
dwell by himself with a soldier that kept him, — in his lodg
ing, — in his own hired house," ch. xxviii. 16, 23, 30. This
must have been owing very much to the honourable testi
monial which Porcius Festus transmitted with him ; and in
part, it is likely, to the account g'iven in by the centurion,
who had conducted Paul and the other prisoners from
Coesarea into Italy ; as also in part, and perhaps chiefly, to
the goodness w of Burrhus, then prsefect of the preetorium,
or captain of the guard to Nero.

There were several methods of x keeping prisoners made

v lisdem consulibus miseriarum ac saevitipe exemplum atrox, reus pater, ac-
cusator filius, (nomen utrique Vibius Serenus) in senatum induct! sunt. Ab
exilio retractus, et turn Catena vinctus, perorante filio. — At contra reus, nihi!
infracto animo, obversus in filium, quatere vincula, vocare ultores Deos, &c.
Tacit. Ann. lib. iv. c. 28.

w Tacit. Ann. lib. xiv. c. 15 et51. Dio. lib. Ixii. p. 706. E.

x Vid. Lipsii et Mureti notas ad Tacit. Ann. 1. iii. c. 22. et Lipsii Excurs. P,

246 Credibility of the Gospel History.

use of in the city and in the provinces. Ulpiansays, ' Thai

* the proconsul is wont to judge, whether the person ought

* to be put into the prison, or delivered to a soldier to keep,

* or whether he should be committed to sureties, or even to

* himself;' (that is, to the accused person himself;) * And

* herein, usually, regard is had to the nature of the crime

* charged upon any one, and to the preservation of his

* honour, as also to the wealth or substance, seemingy inno-

* cence or dignity, of the party accused.'

It is very easy to perceive what was chiefly regarded by
those Roman officers who treated St. Paul so mildly ; not
his wealth, nor his dignity, but his innocence.

There is no one single instance that I know of, that will
so much illustrate the whole story of St. Paul's imprison
ment, as that of Herod Agrippa ; who was imprisoned by
Tiberius in the latter end of his reign, and afterwards came
to be king of all Judea, as has been shown already.

Agrippa had said some improper things of Tiberius, in
the hearing of one of his own servants ; who, having some
time after taken a disgust at his master,2 went and informed
Tiberius against him. Agrippa went one day, as others
did, to wait on Tiberius. Tiberius crediting1 what the ser
vant had said, and bearing likewise some grudge against
Agrippa, ordered Macro the preefect of the prsetorium to
bind him. Whereupon ' the officers took him and bound
' him in his purple dress which he was then in. — But Anto-
4 niaa was extremely afflicted at this misfortune of Agrippa,

* and yet she judged it very difficult to say any thing to

* Tiberius in his favour ; and that, indeed, it would be to
' no purpose. She therefore went to Macro, and desired

* that he would take care that the soldiers which kept guard
' upon him should be civil, good-natured fellows, and that
' the centurion who presided over the guard, and the sol-

* dierb to whom Agrippa was bound, might be men of the
' same character, and that his freedmen and friends might

* have access to him ; and in a word, that he might want

* nothing necessary for his health. These therefore went to
' him, his friend Silas, and his freedmen Marsyas and

•v Proconsul sestimare solet, utrum in carcerem recipienda sit persona, an
militi tradenda, vel fidejussoribus committenda, vel etiam sibi : hac autem vel
pro criminis, quod objicitur, qualitate, vel propter honorem, aut propter am-
plissimas facultates, vel pro innocentia personse, vel pro dignitate ejus, qui ac-
cusatur, facere solet. L. i. ff. de custod. et exhib. reor.

z Joseph. Ant. Lib. xviii. c. 7. sect. 5. p. 810.

a Widow of Drusus, Tiberius's brother, a lady of great virtue, and at good
terms with Tiberius. Vid. Joseph, p. 812.

b Kai

Roman Customs mentioned in the New Testament. 247

* Stcechus, who brought him the provisions he chose to have.

* They brought in likewise bed-clothes, and such like

* things, as if they were for sale, which they accommodated

* him with at night ; the soldiers themselves joining with
4 them in these services, in obedience to Macro's orders.

* Thus things went with Agrippa for six months.'0

When Tiberius was dead, ' there came two letters to

* Rome from Caius [Caligula] ; one to the senate, notifying

* the death of Tiberius, and his own accession to the em-

* pire ; and another to Piso, the praefect of the city, contain-
' ing the same things, and also ordering that Agrippa should

* be removed from thed prcetorium to the house in which

* he had lived before he was bound. Here indeed he was

* in custody, but however he had more liberty, and was at
4 ease. In a short time Caius came to Rome, — and in a few

* days after sent for Agrippa to his palace, ordered him to

* be shaved, and changed his garments ; and then put a
4 diadern on his head, — and made him also a present of a gold
4 chain, of the same weight with the iron one with which he
4 had been6 bound. This chain Agrippa afterwards laid
4 up in the temple of Jerusalem, as a monument that God

* can bring down those things that are great, and raise up
4 those things which aref fallen/

I take it, that Agrippa's first confinement was of the same
kind with that which was allotted St. Paul by Felix after
the first hearing at Coesarea ; with this difference however,
that a good deal of Agrippa's kind usage was given him by
stealth, it not being by the orders of Tiberius, by whom he
Avas committed : whereas the centurion who kept St. Paul
had express orders from Felix, the chief officer in the pro
vince, " to let him have liberty, and to forbid none of his
acquaintance to minister or come unto him ;" which must
have been a considerable advantage. And I reckon that
Agrippa's confinement at last, when he was 4 removed to
4 the house he had lived in before he was bound,' was of
the same kind with St. Paul's custody, when he dwelt at
" Rome in his own hired house."

X. Our taking in at once the whole story of St. Paul's
imprisonment, has obliged us to pass by a particular or
two, which the reader will perhaps think it worth while to
look back for.

I think it not needful to inquire, what St. Paul's right of
appeal was founded in, whether in his citizenship or not,
Acts xxv. 10, 11. I shall only observe that he does not

c Ibid. p. 814, 815. d ATTO ^paToirtds. c Ibid. p. 818.

f Id. lib. xix. c. 6. in.

Credibility of the Gospel History.

insist upon that expressly, but only his innocence. Some
learned men have indeed, upon the occasion of this appeal,
cited the words of Pliny ; in which he tells Trajan, that he
had noted down some of those who were infected with
Christianity to be sent to Rome, ' because they weres citi-
* zens.' But I cannot perceive to what purpose these words
are alleged here. For if Pliny sent those persons to Home,
not for some special reason, but because his power extended
only to the lives of provincials, and not of Roman citizens,
then his power was not at that time equal to that of the Ro
man governors in Jtidea. It is plain from St. Luke, Acts
xxv. 11, 24, 25, that Paul was prosecuted by the Jews for
his life, after he was known to be a Roman. And it is as
plain from Josephus, that the Roman governors of Judea
had power over the lives of Romans. Cumanus11 put to
death a Roman soldier in Judea. And when Josephus*
complains of Florus's crucifying some Jews who were Ro
man knights, he would have complained of somewhat else
beside the manner of their death, if Florus had had no right
to pronounce a capital sentence upon any Roman whatever.
And thus I have by the by given the evidence of a very
material circumstance in this history, namely, that Felix
and Festus had power of trying a Roman for life.

Upon Paul's appeal to Ceesar he was in fact sent to
Rome ; causes were therefore by appeal removed out of the
provinces to Rome. Suetonius says, that Augustus appointed
a number of consular persons at Rome to receive the ap
peals of provincial people, namely, one person to preside
over the affairs of each province.k

St. Luke says also, Acts xxvii. 1. " And when it was
determined that we should sail into Italy, they delivered
Paul and certain other prisoners, unto one named Julius, a
centurion of Augustus' band." It was very common to
send persons from Judea to be tried at Rome. Quintilius
Varus sent to Rome divers of those that had made disturb
ances in Judea, in the interval between Herod's death and
Archelaus's taking possession1 of the government. Ummi-
dius Quadratus, president of Syria, sentm Annas the high
priest and other Jews to Claudius, to answer for themselves

g Fuerunt alii similis amentise ; quos, quia cives Romani erant, annotavi in
urbem remittendos. Lib. x. ep. 97.

h De Bell. lib. ii. c. 12. sect. 2. » See above, p. 236.

k Appellationes quotannis urbanorum quidem litigatorum praetori delegavit j
ac provincialium consularibus viris quos singulos cujusque provincial negotiis
praeposuisset. Vit. August, c. 33.

1 Joseph, de B. J. 1. ii. c. 5. sect. 3. » Ibid. c. 12.

sect. 6. et Ant. 1. xx. c. 5. sect. 2.

Roman Customs mentioned in the New Testament. 249

at Rome, as also several of the most considerable of the
Samaritans. Josephus says that ' Felix, for some slight
' offence, bound and sent to Rome several priests of his ac-
' quaintance, and very good and honest men, to answer for

* themselves to" Caesar.' Felix also sent to Rome Eleazer,
captain of a troop of robbers, and several of his men, whom
he had taken0 prisoners.

XI. There remains but one thing more. " And when we
came to Rome, the centurion delivered the prisoners to the
captain of the guard : but Paul was suffered to dwell by
himself, with a soldier that kept him," Acts xxviii. 16.
Doubtless Paul was consigned by Felix to the " captain of
the guard," as well as the other" prisoners:" but he was
suffered to " dwell by himself," the rest were ordered to a
more strait confinement. The only thing we have to ob
serve here is, that the captain of the guard often had the
custody of prisoners. This appears from the history I have
given above of Agrippa. And it seems, that generally the
prisoners which were sent from the provinces were trans
mitted to this officer, and not to the prefect of the city.
For so Trajan directs Pliny, when he had written to him
for some advice concerning a particular person whom he
had with him in the province ; ' That he should send him
' bound to the praefects of hisp prsetorium :' or in other
words, to the captains of the guard ; there being two at
that time, whereas there was but one when Paul was sent
to Rome. Heliodorus the sophist, being in aq certain island,
fell under a charge of murder. ' Whereupon,' saysr Phi-
lostratus, ' he was sent to Rome, to answer for himself be-

* fore the prefects of the prsetorium.'

11 K«0' ov %povov &tj\i% TIJS ludaiac tTTiTpoTrtvtv, i«p«e TivctQ ffvvT]9eig
ffjioi, KaXaQ KctynOaf, fiut fiiKpav KO.I TTJV Tv%&aav airiav drjffagf «f TJJV 'Pw/ijjv
£7r£/r^£»>, Xoyov vfaZovraQ T(p Kaiffapi* In Vit. sect. 3.

0 De Bell. lib. ii. c. 1 3. sect. 2. P Si— vinctus mitti ad
praefectos praetorii mei debet. Plin. lib. x. ep. 65.

1 About A. D. 223. r Aa/3wv Sri tv ry vrjcru
airtav, aveirep,(p9rj IQ TTJV 'Pu»/jj;j/, wf a7roXoyr;(ro/.t£VO£ TOIQ r&v

Vit. Sophist. 1. 2. num. 32.

250 Credibility of the Gospel History.

CHAP. XI.

THREE REMARKABLE FACTS.

I. The temple forty-six years in building. II. The dearth
in the reign of Claudius. III. The Jews banished from
Rome by the same emperor.

I. WHEN our Saviour was at Jerusalem, at one of the Jews'
passovers, he " made a scourge of small cords, and drove
them that sold oxen and sheep, and the changers of money,
out of the temple," John ii. 14. 15. This action implied a
claim of some particular authority. " Then answered the
Jews, and said unto him, what sign shewest thou unto us,
seeing that thou dost these things ? Jesus answered and said
unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will
raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was
this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three
days ?" Or in other words : ' Forty and six years has this
' temple been building, so far as the work is carried on, and

* many thousand men have been employed upon it all this
' time. And wilt thou alone rebuild it in three days, if it

* were pulled down and demolished?' Ver. 18 — 20.

It ought to be observed here, that Josephus has informed
us, thata Herod the Great, in the eighteenth year of his
reign, made a proposal to the Jews of rebuilding the tem
ple. In eig'ht or nine years' time he finished what he in
tended to do to this sacred place. But the people of the
Jews were after this, as it seems, continually adorning and
improving the buildings of the temple.

It is highly probable, that the term of forty-six years,
mentioned here by the Jews in their reply to our Saviour,
commences at the time when Herod made his proposal to
the Jews, or else at the time, when in pursuance of that
proposal, he actually set about repairing the temple.

There being some chronological difficulties attending the
period of Herod's reign, as well as our Saviour's ministry,
there is between learned men the difference of two or three
years about the exact time when these words were spoken
by the Jews. But I have no occasion at present to concern
myself with any of those difficulties; because it is easy to
B De Bell, lib, i. cap. 21. Ant. lib. xv. cap. 11.

Three Remarkable Facts. 251

show, that the buildings of the temple were continued below
any of the dates affixed to this discourse between our Sa
viour and the Jews.

The evidences for this fact are these : Josephus relating"
affairs which happened in the reign of Nero, after the arrival
of Gessius Floras, procurator of Judea in the year of the
Christian aera 65,b says : * At that time was the temple

* finished. The people, therefore,0 seeing the workmen to
' the number of eighteen thousand lie idle, and apprehend-
' ing that they would stand in need of the wages which

* they were wont to receive for working at the temple ; and

* being' afraid that the money, if laid up, should fall into
' the hands of the Romans ; and moreover, having a regard

* to the workmen, and being willing that the treasures

* should be laid out upon them, (for if any man worked but
' one hour of the day, he presently received his pay,) they
' petitioned thed king to rebuild the east portico. — It was
' the work of king Solomon, who first built the whole tem-
' pie. But the king (the charge and oversight of the tem-

* pie had been committed to him by Claudius Caesar)

* considering, that this would be a work of much time and
' vast expence, did not grant their request. However, he

* was not against paving the city with white marble/

It appears from hence, that the Jews had continually
employed men upon the temple ; for Josephus says, it was
now finished.

If it be inquired, how they were supplied with money to
maintain so many men constantly at work ; I answer, that
Josephus, in the passage just now transcribed, intimates
what the fund was, namely, their sacred treasury. He has
more particularly informed us in another place, where he
says, that on the temple were expended * all the sacred
' treasures, which were supplied by tributes sent to God
' from all parts of the world. >e Beside the ordinary tribute
sent to the temple, the zeal of the people for this work pro
duced liberal contributions.1^

b Usser. Ann. c Hcfy $e TOTS KOI TO ifpov trerfXe^o'

/3\£7rwv sv 6 dijfiog apyrjffavTag TSQ Tf.xviTa^ inrtp pvpisQ KM OKTaKi^xiXisg
OVTCIQ, Kcti p.irr9o(popiaQ tvdttig eaofAevsg Sia TO TTJV Tpotyqv oc rrjg Kara TO ifpov
epyamac; Tropi&nQai, KCII ^pjjjuara /uei> aTroOera Sia TCJV e/c 'Pa»//ata>v 0o/3ov £%«v
8 StXiiJv, Trpovos^vog Se TWV TtyyiTuv, Kai «£ T&TSQ avaXav TUQ SriaavpuQ (3s-
Xojufvoc* Kai -yap ti \iiav Tig wpav TTJQ rjfitpag tpyacraiTO, TOV ^iaQov vTTtp TavTrjg
tvdewg sXa/i/Saytv' £7rti9ov TOV /3aar\ea rr\v avaTO\iKYjv <roav avtytipat' K. X. Ant.
1. xx. c. 8. sect. 7. d Agrippa the younger. e Etg 6 /xa/cpot \itv t$,avr}-

Xu>9r)ffav aiuvtQ aurotg, Kai 01 hpoi Se Srjaavpoi TTCLVTIQ ovg av£7rifjnrXa(rav oe
trapa Tr\q oiKH^evrjg da<Tfj.oi ir^nrontvoi ry O*y. De Bell. lib. v. c. 5. sect. 1.

'H Tt yap datyiXeia TOIV xpilP'CiTCJV, Kai rj TS Xan ^iXort/ita, Xoya
Tag tTrifloXag. Id. ibid. vid. et Ant. 1. xiv. c. 7. sect. 2.

252 Credibility of the Gospel History.

If it be objected, that Joseph us, in the account of the
building of the temple by Herod, says, that the iepoi>, that
is, the cloisters and other buildings of the temple, were
raised in eight years, and the ^ao?, or temple itself, in a
year and a half,s that is, in nine years and a half; I answer,
that Josephus can mean no more than that the temple was
then fitted for use, or that all was then finished that Herod
proposed to do at his cost, and not the completing the
temple and all the buildings belonging to it. This is evi
dent, from the passage just described at length, in which he
says, ' At that time the temple was finished.' And even
these words are to be understood with a limitation. The
temple was not then completed : there was something still
wanting, which the people would have had done. But they
then put an end to repairing and building, and there was
no more work done at the temple.

It is possible, that there might be some interruptions in
the works at the temple ; but it is likely they were very
short, (if there were any,) and such as were not worth
taking notice of in a long period.

II. The next event I would here confirm from some
foreign testimony, is the famine said to have happened in
the reign of Claudius. " And in these days came prophets
from Jerusalem unto Antioch. And there stood up one of
them named Agabus, and signified by the Spirit, that there
should be great dearth throughout all the world, which
came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar. Then the
disciples, every man according- to his ability, determined to
send relief unto the brethren which dwelt in Judea. Which
also they did, and sent it to the elders, by the hands of
Barnabas and Saul," Acts xi. 27—30.

I do not take notice of this famine, as the fulfilment of a
prophecy, because I do not enter into that argument, but
only as a remarkable event, which St. Luke assures us,
happened in the reign of Claudius.

St. Luke says, " In those days came prophets from Jeru
salem unto Antioch." It may be questioned, what was the
exact time of the arrival of these prophets to Antioch, and
of the delivery of the prophecy ; but I think, it is easy to
perceive from St. Luke, when the famine happened. It is
observable, that St. Luke having, in the words just now
transcribed from him in the conclusion of the xith of the
Acts, given an account of the resolution of the church at
Antioch, and of the commission given by them to Barnabas
and Saul, to carry their contributions to Jerusalem, proceeds
s Ant. lib. xv. cap. 1 1. sect. 5, 6.

Three Remarkable Facts. 253

in the xiith chapter to relate the transactions concerning1 the
church at Jerusalem, during- the reign of Herod Agrippa,
and also Herod's death. And then says, " But the word of
God grew and multiplied. And Barnabas and Saul re
turned from Jerusalem, when they had fulfilled their minis
try," Acts xii. 24, 25.

There can be no reason assigned for that interruption in
the course of the narration, and for the delay to mention the
fulfilment of the commission of the church at Antioch, but
this, that the commission was not executed till the death of
Herod Agrippa. Moreover, as the Christians at Antioch
had a previous knowledge of this famine, according to St.
Luke's account, before it happened, it is reasonable to sup
pose, that the famine was but then coming on, when Bar
nabas and Saul fulfilled their ministry. Herod died in the
fourth year of Claudius's reign, A. D. 44. It is very
evident therefore to me, that11 the commencement of this
famine ought not to be placed before the latter end of the
year 44, or perhaps not till the beginning of the year fol
lowing.

But before I proceed to the proofs of this facf, I must
let the reader know how 1 understand it. I think the dearth
prophesied of by Agabus, and related by St. Luke, was in
Judea only. I desire the words themselves may be con
sidered. There " came prophets from Jerusalem, and one
of them signified by the Spirit, that there should be great
dearth throughout the whole world," that is, throughout
the whole land, the country before mentioned, from whence
those prophets came, namely, the land of Judea : that there
would be a great dearth and scarcity, not at Jerusalem only,
which might have been occasioned by some circumstances
peculiar to the city, a siege or some other accident ; but
that there would be scarcity throughout all the land of Ju
dea, by means of a general failure of the usual produce of
the earth.

The original word [ot/cs/iei^] does sometimes signify not
the whole world, but a particular country only.1

h Vid. Usser. Ann. P. J. 4755.

1 'H yr] signifies, the earth : yet the coherence of the words in many places
determines the meaning to some particular country. Jos. ii. 3, " They be
come to search out all the country" [rr}v yjji/j. Luke iv. 25, "But I tell
you of a truth many widows were in Israel, when the heaven was shut up
three years and six months, when great famine was throughout all the land,
cTrt iraaav ri\v yrjv" Not all the earth but all the land of Israel ; that being
the country before mentioned.

In like manner, oiKK^vr] signifies, according to the original notation of the
word, the habitable, or rather the inhabited earth : but the connexion of the

254 Credibility of the Gospel History.

It is evident that the prophecy was understood by the
disciples at Antioch, in whose hearing it was delivered, to
relate to Judea only. There is not the least hint of any
thought of sending relief to any other place, nor yet of any
hesitation in taking the resolution here mentioned, for fear
their own circumstances might be necessitous.

And when it is added, that, in pursuance of their deter
mination, they did actually send relief by the hands of Bar
nabas and Saul, there is not one word bestowed to enhance
the eminence of their charity, in assisting others when they
were in straits themselves, or in immediate danger of them.
And yet it is unlikely, this should have been altogether
omitted, if it had been the case. It is certain, St. Paul has
placed this circumstance in the most beautiful manner, in
the testimony he gives to the churches of Macedonia : " How
that in a great trial of affliction, the abundance of their joy,

discourse often restrains the meaning to some particular country. Isa. xiii. 5,
*< They came from a far country — to destroy the whole land ." In the Sep-
tuagint version it is Traaav rrjv oiKs/jifvrjv' what goes before and follows shows,
that a particular country is intended. Ver. 1, " The burthen of Babylon,
which Isaiah the son of Amos did see." Ver. 19—22, " And Babylon the
glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldees1 excellency, shall be as when
God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah. It shall never be inhabited, neither
shall it be dwelt in from generation to generation : neither shall the Arabian
pitch tent there, neither shall the shepherds make their fold there. But wild
beasts of the desart shall be there. And the wild beasts of the islands shall
cry in their desolate houses, and dragons in their pleasant places." I know
very well that some understand the destruction of the whole land, in the 5th
verse, of the whole Babylonian empire ; but it is without reason. The whole
empire, it is true, would be hereupon dissolved. But any one may perceive,
that the judgment threatened or foretold, is confined properly to the city and
province of Babylon, the seat of the empire, and of the oppressions now to be
avenged. Can any one bear the supposition, that the dreadful destruction
described in this chapter extended, or was intended to extend, to all the parts
of the Babylonish empire ? A note of St. Jerom upon Is. xiii. 4, 5, deserves
to be inserted here, as not a little to our purpose : — ' ut disperdant omnem
' terram :' non quod totum orbem vastaverint sed omnem terram Babylonis et
Chaldaeorum. Idioma est enim sanctae scripture, ut omnem terram illius
significet provincise, de qua sermo est : quod quidam non intelligentes ad
omnium terrarum subversionem trahunt. Hieron. T. 3. p. 109. in.

St. Luke has himself used this word in this sense in another place. I think
it cannot be disputed : Luke xxi. 26, " Men's hearts failing them for fear and
for looking after those things which are coming on the earth ; or the land,
T0)v £7T£pxofj,tvwv Ty oiKgfjLtvy. The whole discourse relates to the calamities
that were coming, not upon the whole world, or the whole Roman empire,
but the land of Judea, ver. 21, " Then let them that are in Judea flee to the
mountains." Out of Judea therefore there would be safety, ver. 23, " But
woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days,
for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people" And
they who should then be in the circumstances just mentioned, would then
be particularly unhappy, because they would be unfit for flight.

Three Remarkable Facts. 255

and their deep poverty, had abounded unto the riches of
their liberality," 2 Cor. viii. 2.

I am very sensible, that the Jews who lived out of their
own country, and all the worshippers of God, in all parts
of the world, had a special regard to the people of Jerusa
lem and Judea ; and were very ready to contribute to them,
when under difficulties. But a famine is a very sore evil :
and if the disciples of Antioch had sent a supply to the
brethren in Judea, when they were apprehensive of a great
dearth k among themselves, such an action would not have
been simply related, but also commended ; at least, this
circumstance would have been taken notice of. It seems
to have been a very general contribution : but so far is
there from being any hint of any straits they were in, that
it is intimated they were in good circumstances : " Every
man, according1 to his ability, determined," &c. — The phrase
imports an easy and plentiful condition. If the dearth had
reached to Antioch, St. Luke would not have said, " every
man, according as he abounded ;" but would have been
obliged to say, not regarding his own want or necessity, or
the general calamity, or somewhat like it.

I hope no one will do me so much wrong, as to suspect,
that I have attempted to put this meaning on the words,
because I have no proof the famine was universal. For I
declare, that if I thought the expressions here used repre
sented an universal dearth ; and at the same time, perceived
the ancient historians described only a particular one, I
would have acknowledged the difficulty. But I think, the
sense I have here represented, is the natural, genuine sense
of the words ; and I persuade myself, the reader is now of
the same opinion."1

fieyav. ' Ka0w£ qvTroptiro rif, wptcrav

m I am not singular in this interpretation. Mr. L'Enfant understands this
text in the same manner : and I have had assistance from his notes in com
posing this article. Since that, I have perceived that Dr. Hammond was of
the same mind. Vid. Annot. in Luc. ii. 1.

Two things seem to me to have carried the generality of learned men off
from the true meaning of St. Luke, and to have induced them to suppose,
that the famine here spoken of was universal ; either all over the world, or at
least the Roman empire. One is the word oncspevij' but this difficulty, I ima
gine, I have removed already. The other is, thr.t several ancient historians
have spoken of famines in the reign* of Claudius, at Greece and Rome. These
must be the only reasons for this supposition ; for the connexion of the
words in St. Luke would never lead any man to think the famine was out of
Judea.

But though there is mention made of famines in Greece, and at Rome, or
in Italy, this will not prove that there was a general famine. It is evident
from Josephus, that during the famine in Judeti, there was plenty in other

256 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Supposing therefore St. Luke to have informed us, that
there was, in the reign of Claudius, a great dearth through-
parts 5 in Cyprus, Egypt, and the territories of king Izates. From the two
former countries queen Helene procured provisions, and Izates sent money
to Jerusalem j which he could not have done, if his own people had been in
want.

The proofs of the famine in Judea I transcribe, or refer to in the text part.
Of the other famines in this reign there are these accounts. Of the famine in
Greece, Eusebius makes mention in his Chronicon. p. 204. Xi/i8 Kara rrjv
'EXXa&z yryovoroQ fjityaXg, 6 TH GITS /zo&0£ e£ ^i^pa^/iwv eTrpaOrj. This famine
happened, according to him, in the 9th of Claudius, A. D. 49. At Rome
there were several famines in this reign, one or more of which are mentioned
by Dio, Suetonius, Tacitus, or Orosius. The first happened in the beginning
of the reign of this emperor. But it seems, from the provisions made by him
for preventing the like for the future, that it was not owing to a general scarcity
at that time, but to the want of a good harbour at the mouth of the Tiber, by
which means the city was ill supplied. Dio's words are thus : ' There being
' a great famine, [Xi/xs re i<r%vp8 ytvofjiEvs, or scarcity,] he [Claudius] not only

* took care for a present supply, but provided also for the time to come.
' Rome is supplied almost solely with corn imported from abroad ; but there

* being no good harbour at the mouth of the Tiber, nor any secure stations for
' ships, the empire of the sea was almost useless to the Romans. For, except
' the corn that was brought in in the summer time, and laid up in granaries, none
' was brought thither in the winter : or if any attempted it, it was with the

* utmost hazard.' Dio. lib. Ix. p. 671, 672. He then proceeds to describe the
great expense which Claudius was at, in making a good port at the mouth of
the Tiber, and a convenient passage from thence up to the city ; of which
Suetonius likewise speaks. Claud, cap. 20. Dio places this famine in the
second year of Claudius, A. D. 42. But it must have begun the year before :
for there are extant medals struck in each of these years in honour of the em
peror, having on their reverse a corn measure with ears of corn hanging over
the side. Vid. Pagi Critic, in Baron. A. D. 42. n. 7. But I very much
question, whether there was any famine then arising from the failure of crops.
At/joe is often used for a famine or scarcity in a city during a siege or blockade.
And Dio proceeding, immediately after the mention of the famine, to observe
the difficulty of coming to Rome in the winter, makes me suspect, this scarcity
was only a hardship the people were in, during the winter, for want of suffi
cient stores and a free passage.

There was another famine at Rome in the latter end of this reign, of which
Tacitus speaks. It is placed by him in the llth of Claudius, A. D. 51.
Claudio V. Serv. Cornelio Orsito Coss. frugum quoque egestas, et orta ex ea.
fames, in prodigium accipiebatur. Nee occulti tantum questus ; sed jura
reddentem Claudium circumvasere clamoribus turbidis, pulsumque in extre-
mam fori partem vi urgebant, donee militum globo infestos perrupit. Quin-
decim dierum alimenta urbi non amplius superfuisse constitit. Magnaque
Deum benignitate & modestia hiemis, rebus extremis subventum. At hercule
olim ex Italiae regionibus longinquas in provincias commeatus portabant. Nee
mine infecunditate laboratur : sed African! potius & .iEgyptum exercemus ;
navibusque & casibus vita populi Romani permissa est. Ann. 12. cap. 43.
Suetonius also has taken notice of a famine in this reign. He does not say
what year it happened in j but the agreement of circumstances shows it to be
the same that Tacitus speaks of. Arctiore autem annona ob assiduas sterili-
tates detentus quondam medio foro a turba, conviciisque ac simul fragminibus
panis ita instratus, ut aegre nee nisi postico evadere in Palatium valuerit: nihil
non excogitavit ad invehendos etiam in tempore hiberno commeatus— et naves

Three Remarkable Facts. 257

out all the land of Judea, I proceed now to give some
foreign evidence of this event.

Josephus, speaking of Helene, the queen of the Adiabenes,
has these words : * Her arrival at Jerusalem was a great
6 blessing to the people ; for the city labouring at that time

* under a heavy famine, so that a great many perished for
6 want, the queen sent abroad several of her officers ; some

* to Alexandria for the purchase of corn, others to Cyprus

* to buy up dried figs. These having used the utmost
4 expedition, as soon as they returned, she distributed food

* to those that were necessitous. By this liberality, she
' laid a lasting obligation upon our whole nation. More-

* over, her son Izates, having heard of the famine, sent a

* large sum of money to the chief men of Jerusalem.'11

Josephus does afterwards inform us when this famine
happened. For having mentioned Cuspius Fadus, (who
was sent procurator into Judea, after the death of Herod, in
the fourth of Claudius, in the latter end of the year 44,)
and his successor Tiberius Alexander, he says, ' In their

mercaturae causa fabricantibus magna commoda constituit. Claud, cap. 18.
Orosius speaks of the same thing ; Verunlamen sequent! anno tanta fames
Romge fuit, ut medio foro, imperator correptus a populo convitiis et fragmini-
bus panis infestatus, aegre per pseudothyrum in Palatium refugiens furorem
excitatse plebis evaserit. lib. vii. cap. 6.

I have set down these passages at length. I reckon I have hereby saved
myself the trouble of making many remarks. The frugum cgestas of
Tacitus, the assiduce sterilitates of Suetonius, were in Italy only j and these,
possibly, not so much owing to bad seasons as wrong management, as is inti
mated by Tacitus. This was certainly one reason why famines were so com
mon at Rome. There is no notice taken by these authors of scarcities in
other places at the same time. The famine, as described by Tacitus, was
only in the winter. And when the granaries at Rome were almost empty, by
the goodness of the gods, and the mildness of the winter, [modestia hiemis,]
ships arrived safe with sufficient provisions.

I am not at all solicitous to prove, that there was no general famine
throughout the Roman empire in the reign of Claudius. However, I thought
it not amiss to let the reader see how the case seems to me to stand at present.
And though some person should hereafter show, that there was an universal
famine some time in this reign ; yet that alone would not alter my opinion
concerning the meaning of the words of St. Luke, who, I think, speaks of
nothing beside a dearth in Judea.

II Tivtrai Se avrrjg rj a0t£i£ iravv avfifapsaa TOIQ 'lepoaoXvfjuraG' Xi/j,& yap
avTd)V TTJV iroXiv \ina TOV Katpov tKtivov iritZsvTOQ, KUI TroXXwv VTT evdtiag
ai/aXwjuarwv (pOtipofjitvwv, TJ BatriXiffera 'EXtvrj TTtfjnrei Tivag TMV tavrrjg, TSQ
IJLSV tig ri]v AXt^avSptiav, iroXvv airov tttvrjffOfJLevsQ xprjuaTtov, rug dt tig
KvTrpov i<T%aS<i)v Qoprov oiaovraq' w£ cs. TraXiv r)\9ov Ta\ttt)Q Kop,i£ovTtg, TOIQ
aTTOpsfievaig Sifveifie Tpofyrjv, KCU /ityiT^v aurrjs fivnfj,r)v TIJQ eviroiiag ravr.rjg tig
TO irav r//ia>v tQvog KaraXtXoiTrt* TrvQoptvoQ Se «at 6 TTO.IQ avTtjQ I^UTTJQ TCI irtpi
TOV Xtfiov, £7r£/t7n//e TroXXa x9niJiaTa TOIQ Trpwrot^ rwv 'lepoffoXv/urwv. Antiq.
lib. xx. cap. 2. sect. 6.

VOL. I. S

258 Credibility of the Gospel History.

* time0 a great dearth happened in Judea: when queen

* Helene, having purchased corn in Egypt with large sums
' of money, gave it away amongst the poor, as I have re-

* lated above.'

So that this famine oppressed the land of Judea several
years. It might begin in the fourth of Claudius ; but I
think it must have been chiefly in the fifth and sixth years
of his reign.

I apprehend, I have shown from Josephus, that what St.
Luke has here related is punctually true. Josephus may
be justly supposed to be well acquainted with what hap
pened at Jerusalem and in Judea, in the reign of Claudius :
and the whole story of Izates and his mother Helene, is an
affair he is much pleased with.

Eusebius likewise mentions this famine in his Chronicles,?
and in his Ecclesiastical History.** He places it in the
fourth of Claudius, and seems to have supposed it univer
sal all over the world.

Orosius also speaks of this famine, and says it happened in
the fourth of Claudius, and that it oppressed Syria. I place
his words in the margin,8 though he has committed one
great mistake in supposing that Helene, the queen of the
Adiabenes, was a Christian.

Though I should take no particular notice of it here, yet
I hope the reader would not omit to observe the agreement
of customs in the sacred writers and Josephus. The disci
ples at Antioch no sooner heard that there was like to be a
dearth in the land of Judea, but they, " every man accord
ing- to his ability," some Jews by birth, others proselytes of
righteousness, others, possibly, proselytes of the gate, " de
termined to send relief unto the brethren which dwelt there."
Helene, the queen of the Adiabenes, and Izates her son,
both proselytes to Judaism, did the same thing.

We may proceed somewhat farther to observe upon this
occasion, that the Jews of Judea seem to have expected it
as due to them, that some particular, regard should be

E?rt ruTOig fit) Kai TOV peyav \ijiov Kara TI}V I&Saiav Gvv
' 6v Kca rj flaaiXiaaa 'EXevi;, TroXXwi/ x9WaTUV ^vrjaafjitrr] crirov arro

ditveifie TOIQ cnropajjitvoiG, WQ Trpotnrov. Ibid. cap. 5. sect. 2.
P Page 79, 204. 1 Lib. ii. cap. 12.

r 'H ev raiQ irpaZeaiv Aya(3n irpotyijTtia irtTrtpa.'za.i, Xt/ts fieya\s
rog TI\V oixafitvrjv £TTI KXavSm. Chronic. Can. p. 204.

s Eodem anno (quarto) fames gravissima per Syriam facta est, quam etiam
prophetae praenuntiaverant. Sed christianorum necessitatibus apud Hierosoly-
mam, convectis ab -ZEgypto frumentis, Helena Adiabenorum regina, conversa
ad fidem Christi, largissime ministravit. lib. vii. c. 6.

Three Remarkable Facts. 259

showed them by the rest of their countrymen, and by all
who came over to the worship of the true God, and were
admitted to share in any of the privileges of the Jewish
people. Thus St. Paul assures us, Gal. ii. 10, " Only they
would that we should remember the poor, the same which
I also was forward to do." The very1 last time that St.
Paul was at Jerusalem : " After many years," says he, " I
came to bring" alms to my nation, and offerings," Acts xxiv.
17. Nor was St. Paul's argument a new thought, though
expressed by him with a divine temper : " But now I go
unto Jerusalem to minister unto the saints : for it hath
pleased them of Macedonia and Achaia, to make a certain
contribution for the poor saints which are at Jerusalem.
It has pleased them verily, and their debtors they are.
For if the Gentiles have been made partakers of their spi
ritual things, their duty is also to minister to them in car
nal things," Rom. xv. 25—27.

No wonder therefore, that the bigots among the Jews
were startled at the thought of any relaxation of the ancient
rigour, with which they had treated proselytes ; and that
they laboured, as they did, to maintain their jurisdiction
over them. This contention was not at all for the sake of
God and the law, but partly for themselves. Doubtless,
the outcry of the Jews against St. Paul, though very un
just and groundless, was, every word of it, expressive and
popular, especially at Jerusalem : " This is the man, that
teacheth all men every where, against the people, and the
law, and this place," Acts xxi. 28.

III. I conclude with the banishment of the Jews from
Rome. " After these things, Paul departed from Athens,
and came to Corinth. And found a certain Jew, named
Aquila, born in Pontus, lately come from Italy, with his
wife Priscilla, because that Claudius had commanded all
Jews to depart from Rome," Acts xviii. 1, 2.

Dio says, that Claudius did not banish the Jews from
Rome, but only prohibited their" assemblies. But Sueto
nius, who lived nearer the time, says, ' He expelled the Jews
' from Rome, who were continually raising disturbances,
' Chrestus being their leader.' v

1 Unless we suppose (which is the opinion of some very learned and judi
cious men) that he went thither again, after he had been sent to Rome. See
in Miscellanea Sacra, the Abstract, p. 48.

TrXeovaaavTctQ avOig, tore xa\£7rwf av avtv rafta^nQ VTTO

Dio, Lb. lx. p. 669. B.
v Judaeos, impulsore Chresto, assidue tumultuantes, Roma expulit. Sueton.
Claud, cap. 25.

s2

260 Credibility of the Gospel History.

It is disputed by learned men,w whether by Chrestus,
Suetonius means Jesus Christ. I need not concern myself
with that point here. This passage proves what I bring it
for.

Josephus has no where particularly mentioned this event.
This edict of Claudius seems not to have been long in force.
That may be one reason of this omission in Josephus : an
other reason might be, that it was no agreeable task to him,
to mention any disgraces cast upon his people. If some
disputes between the Jews and followers of Jesus Christ
were really the cause of this order, that might be another
reason ; Josephus having been very reserved, if not alto
gether silent, about the affairs of the Christians.

BOOK II. CHAP. I.

THREE OBJECTIONS AGAINST LUKE, CHAP. II. VER. 1,2.

I. The first objection, That there is no mention made by any
ancient author of a decree in the reign of Augustus for
taxing all the world, stated and answered. II. The
second objection, That there could be no taxing made in
Judea, during the reign of Herod, by a decree of
Augustus, stated and answered. III. The third objection,
That Cyrenius was not governor of Syria, till several
years after the birth of Jesus, stated, together with a
general answer. IV. Divers particular solutions of this
objection. V. The last solution confirmed and improved.
VI. Divers particular difficulties attending the supposi
tion, that this taxing was made by Cyrenius, considered.

THE history of the New Testament is attended with many
difficulties. Jewish and heathen authors concur with the
sacred historians in many things. But it is pretended, that
there are other particulars in which they are contradicted
by authors of very good note.

Among these, the difficulties which may be very properly
considered in the first place, are those which relate to the

w Vid. Usser. Ann. P. J. 4767. Witsii Meletemata Leyd. de Vit. Paul,
sect. vii. n. 2, 3.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 261

account St. Luke has given of the taxing in Judea, which
brought Joseph and the Virgin to Bethlehem, a little before
the birth of Jesus, Luke ii. 1—5, " And it came to pass
in those days, that there went out a decree from Ceesar
Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. (And this
taxing was first made, when Cyrenius was governor of
Syria.) And all went to be taxed, every one into his own
city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the
city of Nazareth, into Judea, unto the city of David, which
is called Bethlehem, (because he was of the house and
lineage of David,) to be taxed with Mary his espoused
wife, being great with child."

Against this account several objections have been raised. a
They may be all reduced to these three.

I. It is objected, That there is no mention made in any
ancient Roman or Greek historian, of any general taxing of
people all over the world, or the whole Roman empire, in
the time of Augustus, nor of any decree of the emperor for
that purpose : whereas, if there had been then any such
thing, it is highly improbable, that it should have been
omitted by them.

II. St. Matthew says, ch. ii. 1, " That Jesus was born in
the days of Herod the king." Judea, therefore, was not at
that time a Roman province, and there could not be any
taxing made there by a decree of Augustus.

III. Cyrenius was not governor of Syria till nine or ten,
perhaps twelve, years after the birth of Jesus. St. Luke
therefore was mistaken, in saying, that this taxing was made
in his time. This objection will be stated more fully hereafter.

I. By way of answer to the first objection.

1. I allow, that there is not any mention made by an
cient writers of any general taxing all over the world, or
of all the subjects of the Roman empire, in the reign of
Augustus.

Many learned men having been of a different opinion, I
am obliged to consider their proofs.

Tillemontb puts the question, (for he does not assert it,)
whether Pliny has not referred to such a thing ? But it is
plain from Pliny's words, that he speaks of a partition of
Italy only into several districts,0

a Vid. Spanhem. Dubia. Evangelica. Part. ii. Dub. iv. v. &c. Huct.
Demonst. Evangel. Prop. ix. cap. x. et Commentatores.

b Tillemont, Memoires Eccles. Tom. i. Not. ii. Sur Jesus Christ.

c Nunc ambitum ejus, urbesque enumerabimus. Qua in re praefari neces-
sarium est, auctorem nos Divum Augustum secuturos, descriptionemque ab eo
factam Italiae totius in regiones xi. Plin. lib. iii. cap. 5.

262 Credibility of the Gospel History.

There is a passage also of Dio, which has been referred
to upon this occasion : but it has evidently no relation to
the matter before us. The Romans had a tax called the
twentieth : this tax was grievous to many people ; Augustus
therefore desired the senate to consider of some other.
' But the senate not finding any proper expedient, he in-
' timated, that he would raise money upon lands and houses,
' without telling them what, or in what manner it should
' be ; and hereupon sent officers abroad, some one way, and
6 some another, to make a survey of the estates, both of
4 particular persons and cities. But upon this, the senate
4 complied immediately, and the old tax of the twentieth

* was confirmed, lest a worse thing should come in its room.
' This was all Augustus aimed at, and the survey was laid

* aside.' d Besides, this affair happened, A. U. 766, A. D.
13, long after the taxing which St. Luke speaks of.

The passage which Baronius6 has quoted from ^Ethicus,
he does himself allow to relate only to a geometrical de
scription of the empire, begun by order of Julius Csesar,
and finished in thirty-two years, and therefore over long-
before the taxing mentioned by St. Luke.

I am afraid to mention his argument from Pliny, lest it
should be thought, that I intend to divert the reader, when
we ought to be serious. Pliny says, * And as for Augustus

* himself, whom all mankind rank in this class, [of fortunate,]

* if the whole course of his life be carefully considered,
' there will be observed in it many instances of the fickle-
' ness and inconstancy of human affairs.'f But Baronius
supposes, that Pliny says, that ' in every census mention is

* made of Augustus, and that there was so particularly in

* that made by Vespasian and Titus, because he first made^

* a survey of the whole Roman empire :' thus making Pliny
to refer, in the passage he quotes from him, not to what
went before, but to a passage which follows four chapters
lower.

d Kai Trapa^pjjjua fjLrjfiev tnrwv, }irjff offov, /w^0' oTTWf O.VTO
aXXsg a\Xy, TO. re TWV idiwTiiiv Kai TO. rtov TroXtwv KTr^iara a?roypa-
•fyoHtvsg' iva OJQ Kai /m£ovwf ^juiwfljjffojufvoi Stiffum, Kai TIJV tt/co-rqi/ reXav av
S'sXwvrar 6 Kat tytvf.TQ. Dio, i. 56. p. 588. E.

e Apparat. N. 79. f In Divo quoque Augusto quern

universa mortalitas in hac censura nuncupat, si diligenter aestirnentur cuncta,
magna sortis humana? reperiantur volumina. Lib. vii. cap. 45.

8 Idemque dum haec alibi ait ; [lib. vii. cap. 45.] In Divo quoque Augusto,
quern universa mortalitas in hac censura nuncupat, nempe earn, quam Vespasia-
nus et Titus recens egerunt, de qua idem inferius [ibid. cap. 49.] meminit, signi-
ficare videtur, in quolibet repetito in orbe Romano lustris singulis censu, men-
tionem Augusti fieri ; quod primus omnium universum orbem Romanum sub-
jectum imperio eensuisset At de censibus satis. Baron, ubi supra.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 263

Some have alleged, as a proof of this general taxing,
some words of Suidas, who in his Lexicon11 says, * That
' Augustus sent out twenty men of great probity into all
« parts of his empire, by whom he made an assessment of

* persons and estates, ordering a certain quota to be paid
' into the treasury. This was the first census ; they who
' were before him having at pleasure exacted tribute of those

* who had any thing; so that it was a public crime to be rich.'

But itais difficult to take this upon Suidas's authority
alone, since he says not in what part of Augustus's reign it
was done, quotes no author for it, and it is not to be found
in any ancient writer now extant ; though possibly, he refers
to the story just now told from Dio ; who assures us, that
project he mentions was never executed. Besides, Suidas
says, this was the first census ; which is a very great mis
take. There had been before Augustus many assessments
of Roman citizens, and likewise of divers provinces of the
Roman empire.

In another place Suidas says, * Augustus had a desire to
' know the number of all the inhabitants of the Roman cm-
' pire.'1 And he mentions the number, which he says was
found upon the inquiry. But Suidas must have been mis
taken. Archbishop Usher's remark upon this passage is
worth placing here. ' In their consulship [Caius Marcitis

* Censorinus, and C. Asinius Gall us] there was a second

* muster made at Rome, in which were numbered 4,233,000

* Roman citizens, as is gathered out of the fragments of the
' Ancyran marble. In Suidas, in A^ryac-ros the number is far
' less of those that were mustered, 4,101,017, which yet he
' very ridiculously obtrudeth upon us, not for the muster
' of the city only, but of the world.' k

The late learned editor1 of Suidas does also highly ap-

h In VOC. ATToypa^?;' A.iroypa(f>r) 17 cnrapiOprjaig, 'O 8e Katcrap Awy8<ro£, 6
Hovap%r)ffa<;, tiKOGiv avSpag rsg aptT8£ TOV fliov Kai TOV TOOTTOV C7riX«^a/i«rof,
€7ri Traffav ri]v yrjv TWV VTDIKOWV ££€7r£/r«J/£' Si w'v airoypa(f>aQ eTroirjffaro TWV re
avOpaiTrwv, /cat ra»v sffiwv, avrapxr] nva rrpo^a'^ag Tq> drjfioaiq) poipav £/c raraij/
£i(T0ep£(70ai. AVTIJ >; a?roypa0J7 TrpdiTtj eytvero, ru>v Trpo avra rag
ri fir] atj)aipr]i4£v<j)v, w£ tivai TOLQ cuTropoig Srjfioffiov eyK\r}[A,a TOV Tr

* V. AyysTog" Avya-og Ka«rap So^av aury TravraQ oiKTjTOpag '
Kara 7rpo(ra>7rov api^jnei, /3«Xo/ievo£ yvwi/at TTOGOV £<rt TrXqOog* KO.I
ol rrjv P(i)fiai(i)v oiKsvreg vi fjivpiaSfg »cat %i\toi t£' av$p6£*

k Annals: Year of the world, 3996. p. 786. Engl. Edit. Lond. 1658. In
the Latin the last words are : Qui tamen non pro urbis tantum, sed pro orbis
etiam Romani, censu ridicule nobis ibi obtruditur.

1 De hoc loco vide omnino Casaubonum contra Baron. Exerc. 1. Num. 93.
et Usser. — qui recte observarunt, Suidam hie censum urbis pro censu orbis
Romani lectori obtrudere ; cum ridiculum sit credere, non plures fuisse totius
imperii Romani incolas, quam quot Suidas hie exprimit. Kuster, in loc.

264 Credibility of the Gospel History.

prove of this censure passed upon his author, by our most
learned and excellent archbishop. It is observable, that
they both use here the word city [urbis censu], I hope,
however, they mean not the city of Rome only, and the
country round about it, but the Roman citizens all over the
Roman empire, or at least all Italy : for otherwise, with
submission, I should think them, in this particular, almost
as unreasonable as Suidas. It is incredible, that there
should have been at Rome and in the country round about
it, besides strangers and slaves, which were very numerous,
so many Roman citizens, as are mentioned on the Ancyran
marble ; even though all who were entered in a census, be
set down there ; which, however, is denied by some. I
suppose then, that by the muster of the city, these learned
men mean the muster or census of Roman citizens in any
part of the Roman empire, as opposed to all the people in
general, living in the same empire. And in this sense onlym
I adopt their censure of Suidas ; and cannot but think it
very just. The number of the inhabitants of the Roman
empire must needs have exceeded the numbers mentioned
by Suidas, or on the marble ; though it should be supposed,
that none are included in these numbers, but those who
were arrived at military age. This might be sufficient to
show that the number of the Ancyran marble is not the
number of all the people of the Roman empire : but other
reasons will appear presently.

I must in the next place, take the liberty of considering
what Prideaux has said upon this subject, who, with Huet"
and others, thinks that this description or survey in Judea
belonged to one of the surveys made by Augustus ; and
that, in particular, it was a part of his second census, ' The
* first was in the year when he himself was the sixth time,
' and M. Agrippa, the second time consuls, that is, in the
' year before the Christian sera 28. The second time in the
consulship of C. Marcius Censorinus, and C. Asinius
Gal I us, that is, in the year before the Christian sera 8. And
the last time in the consulship of Sextus Pompeius Nepos,
that is, in the year of the Christian sera 14. In the first
and last time he executed this with the assistance of a
colleague ; but the second time he did it by himself alone,
and this is the description which St. Luke refers to. The
decree concerning it was issued out the year I have men
tioned, that is, in the 8th year of the Christian sera, which

m I think this evidently Kuster's sense. His Orbis Kotna?ii is afterwards ex
plained by tctius imperil Romani incolas. Therefore his urbis census imports
Roman citizens living any where. " Demon. Evang. ubi supra, sect. iii.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 265

' was three years before that in which Christ was born. —

* That we allow three years for the execution of this decree,

* can give no just reason for exception. The account

' taken by the decree of Augustus at the time of our Sa-
' viour's birth, extended to all manner of persons, and also

* to their possessions, estates, qualities, and other circum-

* stances. And when a description and survey like this was

* ordered by William the Conqueror, to be taken for Eng-
' land only, I mean that of the Doomsday book, it was six

* years in making : and the Roman province of Syria was

* much more than twice as big as all England.'0

To all this I shall only say, 1. That the surveys made by
Augustus were of Roman citizens only. So he says him
self, in the inscription of the Ancyran marble. P And the
Roman historians say the same thing. 1 But the census or
description made in Judea, according to St. Luke's account,
was of all the inhabitants of that country, which certainly
were not, all of them, Roman citizens.

2. The years which Prideaux mentions, were not the
years in which the decrees were issued out, but in which
the surveys were finished. This appears to me the most
natural meaning of the words of the inscription.

Perhaps it will be objected, that the consulships here set
down, do not denote the years in which a census was finish
ed, but in which it was resolved upon and entered in the
Fasti, or public acts; and that the sense of the inscription
may be thus : In such and such consulship I made a census,
by which census, when finished, the number of citizens was
found to be so and so. It may be likewise said, that the
phrase Lustrum feci, does not necessarily import the making
the Lustrum, which was done when the census was over,
but that Lustrum is here synonymous with census. And
it may be urged, that when Lustrum denotes the solemn
sacrifice at the conclusion of the census, the verb condo is
used, and not facio, which we have here.

To this I answer, that by the account here given of the

0 Prideaux Conn. Part. ii. p. 650, 652. 8vo. Edit. 1718.

P Et in Consulatu. Sexto. Censum. populi. Collega. M, Agrippa. Egi.—
Quo. Lustro civium Romanorum. Censita. sunt Capita. Quadragiens. Cen
tum. Millia. Et. Sexaginta. Tria. — Cum — Nuper. Lustrum. Solus. Feci. Legi.
Censorum. 1. Sinio. Cos. Quo. Lustro. Censa. sunt. civium Romanorum.
Quadragenrs. Centum. Millia. et Ducenta. Triginta. Tria — In consulatu. Fi. —
Cum. nuperrime — Lustrum. Cum. Lega. Tiberio. Sext. Pompeio. Et. Sext.
Apuleio. Cos. Quo. Lustro. Rom. Capitum. Quadragens. Centum. Mil. —
Jginta. Et. Septem. Mil. Legi.

q Recepit et morum legumque regimen zeque perpetuum : quo jure, quan-
quam sine censurae honore, censum tamen populi ter egit. Suet, in Aug. c. 27.

266 Credibility of the Gospel History.

third census, we are obliged to suppose, that the consul
ships here named, denote the times when each census was
finished. Sextus Pompeius and Sextus Apuleius, in whose
consulship the last census is placed, were consuls A. U.
767, A. D. 14. And Augustus died the 19th of August
that very same year. If the census had been only begun,
and not finished, he could not have set down on the table,
as he has done, the number of citizens which was found in
that census. Moreover, it is plain fromr Suetonius, that
Tiberius was nominated for colleague of Augustus in this
census, the year before, if not sooner. It is likely, the
census might be then entered in the public acts : but how
ever that be, it is plain, that the date on the Ancyran marble
signifies the completing of the census. And I think, that
the passage I have just quoted from Suetonius may remove
the scruple relating to the phrase ; since he has used the
verb condo ; by which we are fully assured, that the cen
sus was finished, and the solemn sacrifice performed at the
conclusion of it, in the year set down on the Ancyran
marble.

Farther, Augustus, in the Ancyran marble, places his first
census in his own sixth consulship, Agrippa being his col
league. And Dio says expressly, that Augustus made, or
finished8 the census in that year. This being the case as to
the first and third census of Augustus, we may conclude
the same thing also with reference to the second, and that
it was finished the eighth year before the Christian rera :
consequently, it is impossible that St. Luke's description
should have been a part of if.

After Augustus's death, there were three books found
among his papers : and one of these is alleged as a proof,
that there had been made some general survey of the Ro
man empire, and that about this time. Prideaux's words
are these, ' Of the book, which Augustus made out of the
' surveys and descriptions, which were at this time returned
* to him out of every province and depending kingdom
' of the Roman empire, Tacitus/ Suetonius," and Dio

r A GermaniS, in urbem post biennium regressus, triumphum, quern distule-
rat, egit. — Dedicavit et Concordiae aedem. Ac non multo post lege per coss.
kita, ut provincias cum Augusto communiter admin istraret, simulque censum
ageret, condito lustro in Illyricum profectus est. Vit. Tiber, c. 20, 21.

s Kai rag vTroypaQag f^trcXtcrt. Lib. liii. p. 496. C.

1 Cum proferri libellum recitarique jussit. Opes publicse continebantur.
Quantum civium, sociorumque in armis : quas classes, regna, provincia?, tri-
buta aut vectigalia, et necessitates et largitiones, quae cuncta sua manu per-
scripserat Augustus. Tacit. Ann. lib. i. c. 11.

u De tribus voluminibus, uno mandata de funere suo complexus est : altero,

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 267

4 Cassius,v make mention, and represent it to be very near
* of the same kind with our Doomsday book above men-
« tioned.'

But I do not see how Augustus's having had by him a
little book, (libellum, Breviarium imperii), written with his
own hand, containing a small abridgment of the public
taxes, imposts, and revenues, can be any proof, that this
state of the empire was formed upon a survey made at this
time, or indeed, upon any general survey made at any other
time, by virtue of any one single decree, (that is St. Luke's
phrase,) for the whole empire. This statement, which Au
gustus had by him, of the public strength and riches, might
have been formed upon surveys made at different times.
Nay, he might have in this book the state of dependent
kingdoms, in some of which a census had never been made.
And it is likely, it may appear in the progress of this ar
gument, that there were several countries, branches of the
Roman empire, which had never been obliged to a census.

Beside that there is not found in any ancient Roman his
torian any account of a general census of all the countries
and people of the Roman empire ; there are considerations
taken from the nature of the thing, which render it very
improbable, that a general census should ever have been
appointed at one time. The Roman assessments were al
ways disagreeable things in the provinces, and often caused
disturbances. An universal census at the same time seems
to have been impracticable. And there does not appear in
any Roman historian so much as a hint, that such a thing
was ever thought of by any of their emperors.

What is just now said of the difficulty of making a gene
ral survey at one and the same time, affects chiefly Pri-
deaux's sentiment, who seems to think that the taxing St.
Luke speaks of was a proper Roman census. They who
suppose that it was only a numbering of the people, are not
particularly concerned with it.

2. 1 am of opinion, that St. Luke speaks only of a taxing
in Judea ; and that the first verse of his second chapter
ought to be rendered after this manner ; " And it came to
pass in those days, that there went forth a decree from Cce-

indicem rerum a se gestarum, quern vellet incidi in acneis tabulis, quee ante
Mausoleum statuerentur : tertio, breviarium totius imperii, quantum militum
ubique sub signis esset, quantum pecuniae in aerario et fiscis, et vectigalium
residuis. Suet, in Aug. c. 101.

v To rpirov ra Te TWV ^parujrojv KO.I ra TCJV Trpocro^wv, rwv re avaXw/iarwv
roiv dripoauov, TO re. 7r\r)9oQ ruv tv TOig Srrjaavpoig xPr!P'aT(OV T)io. 1. Ivi. p.
591. D

268 Credibility of the Gospel History.

sar Augustus, that all the land should be taxed." So L'En-
fant has translated it.w Bynseus likewise is of the same
sentiment, and has supported it, in my judgment, very
well.*

I have shown in another? place, that the word we have
here does sometimes denote a particular country only, and
that St. Luke has used it for the land of Judea. And he
must be so understood in this place. The decree relates to
the land of Judea only, because2 the account that follows
is of that country only. And must every one perceive some
deficiency, if oucx/Liefi] be here rendered the whole world, or
the Roman empire ? Let us see what St. Luke says, omit
ting at present the parenthesis. " And it came to pass in
those days, that there went out a decree from Ceesar Au
gustus that all the world should be taxed. And all went
to be taxed, every one into his own city. And Joseph also
went up from Galilee out of the city of Nazareth." If the
account of the decree had been worded by St. Luke so ge
nerally, as to comprehend the whole world, would he not
have taken some notice of the land of Judea, before he came
to relate particularly what was done in it ?

If it be enquired : If the land of Judea only be meant,
what does the term " all" signify ? I answer, it was very
necessary to be added. At the time when St. Luke wrote,
and indeed from the death of Herod, which happened soon
after the nativity of Jesus, the land of Judea, or of Israel,
had suffered a dismembering. Archelaus had to his share
Judea properly so called, together with Samaria and Idumea ;
and the province of Judea, which was afterwards governed
by Roman procurators, was pretty much of the same ex
tent. But Galilee, Iturea, and other parts of the land of

w En ce temps la, il fut public un edit de la part de Cesar Auguste, pour
fmre un denombrement de tout le pai's. Nouveau Test, voyez les notes.

x Antonius Bynaeus de Natali J. Christi. lib. i. c. 3. sect. v. vi.

y See p. 253. n. d. Some time after this whole chapter was in a man
ner quite finished, I met with Keuchenii Annotata in N. T. He has upon this
text alleged some other examples of this use of oiKs^vri. I rely upon those
I have produced in the place referred to, and shall not trouble the reader with
more. z What is above was written several months

before I had seen Keuchenius. But my sentiments are so much confirmed by
what he has said upon the same subject, that I am persuaded the reader will
allow me to take the advantage of subjoining here from him what follows :
Praeterea, an veri speciem habet, Augustum uno eodemque tempore descriptio-
nem per totum orbem Romanum instituere voluisse ? accedit quod omnes, v.
3. ad civitatem patriam profecti leguntur, ut describerentur : nimirum illud
•xavTtQ respicit ad iraaav rt\v oucsfitvrjv, cujus descriptio injuncta fuisse vers.
1. legitur, et istius mandata auctoritate omnes impulsi, et ad propriam civitatem
profecti esse memorantur.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 269

Israel, had been given to other descendants of Herod the
Great.

St. Luke's words, therefore, are extremely proper and
expressive, that " all the land should be taxed ;" to show,
that this decree of Augustus comprehended Galilee, the
country in which Joseph lived. That this was the intention
in adding this term of universality, is evident from St.
Luke's specifying immediately afterwards the name of the
city, from which Joseph came to Bethlehem ; which city
was not in the country that originally belonged to the tribe
of Judah, nor situated in the bounds of the province of
Judea at the time in which St. Luke is supposed to write,
but was of the kingdom of Judea, in the reign of Herod.

It seems needless to observe, that it was very common to
add the term, all or whole, to Judea, or land, when persons
intended the land of the Israelites. There are divers in
stances in the Old and New Testament. And Josephus,
speaking of Agrippa the elder, who had been possessed of
all the territories subject to his grandfather Herod the Great,
says : ' He had now reigned three years over the whole
' land of Judea.' a

Though I am very well satisfied from the context, that
St. Luke comprehends nothing in Augustus's decree beside
the land of Judea; yet it is no small confirmation of this
interpretation, that the most early Christian writers seem to
have understood St. Luke in the same manner. For when
they speak of this circumstance of our Saviour's nativity,
they never say any thing of a general census all over the
world, or the Roman empire.

Justin Martyr in his first Apology informs the emperor

and the senate of the time and place of Christ's nativity.

Bethlehem,' says he, ' in which Jesus Christ was born, is

a village in the country of the Jews, at the distance of five

and thirty stadia from Jerusalem. You may assure your

selves of this from the census made in the time of Cyre-

nius, your first procurator in Judea.' b He mentions this

census also in several other places, and always in the same

manner.0 I do not recollect above one passage of Irenaeus,

a TpiTov Se tTOQ avT(f) fiaviXevovri TTJQ bXqe I«£aiaf 7r£7r\»/pwro. Joseph, p.
871. v. 34. b KajfAtj 8e TIQ ETIV tv ry %wpp Is&u

a7rex«<Ta <ra&«e Tpiateovra Trevre 'lepovoXvpuv, iv y eytvvrjQr) Irjcr&g Xpt<rog,
Kai p,a9tiv $vvaa9e etc ruv a-iroypaQuv TU>V yevo/tevwv tin Kvprfvis TH uj
(v Ixdaiq, Trpura yivopevti eTrtrpOTrs. Just. Mart. Ap. 1. p. 75. E.

c IIpo erwv ficarov Trtvrqicovra ytytvvnaQai TOV X/OITOV \£y«v ^ftag firt
Kvprjvm. Ibid. p. 83. B. ATToypa^rjs uvrjg tv rn ladaig, rore TrpuTrjQ £7Tt
Kvpnvis' K. T. \. Dial. ii. p. 303. D.

270 Credibility of the Gospel History.

in which there is any notice taken of this census, d and that
is not very material.

St. Clement of Alexandria says : * Our Lord was born in
' the eight and twentieth year, when they first ordered a
' census to be made in the time of Augustus.' e

Grig-en confounds this census with that afterwards made
in Judea byf Cyrenius, but says nothing of its being uni
versal. And indeed the passage amounts almost to a posi
tive proof, that he thought the census related to Judea
only.

Tertullian has often made mention of the time of the rise
of Christianity, in his Apology addressed to the Roman ma
gistrates,^ in his books inscribed to the Gentiles :h of this
and the census in his treatises written against the Jews1 and
against heretics :k but yet there is no notice taken of any
census beside that in Judea.

If any think that we are to expect no mention of a gene
ral census from the Christian writers, because the census in
Judea was all that was to their purpose : I say, that a
general census of all the people and countries of the Roman
empire was very much to their purpose, the more to illus
trate the epoch of our Saviour's nativity. A general census
must have been better known than one that was particular.
Would Justin Martyr, Origen, and Tertullian, have omitted
this circumstance, if St. Luke had mentioned it ? or if they
themselves were aware of it ? And yet in their time certain
ly an universal census, made in the reign of Augustus,
could not have been forgotten.

Nay, though the universality of the census had been a
circumstance of no importance at all in their argument, yet
it is almost impossible, but it must have dropped from them

d Sed proximae aetatis dicebant, [Judaei, Job. viii. 56, 57.] sive vere scientes
ex conscriptione census, sive conjicientes secundum aetatem, quam vidcbant
habere eum super quadraginta. Iren. lib. ii. cap. xxii. sect. 6.

e EyevvrjOri Be 6 Kvpioc r/juwv TQ oySoty KM £tKo<r<^ erei, ore Trpwrov eiceXiv-
aav aTToypa^ctf yf.vf.cQai. Clem. Strom, lib. i. p. 339. D.

f Kat jM£r' tKtivov [Qtvdav] tv rate; TTIQ cnroypcKfrrjg r)fj.£paiQ, or' toiKC yeytv-
viyvdai o Ij/(T8£, I&dac; TIQ FaXiAaioc TroAXgg f.avT<p (TwaTre^Jjcftv CLTTO TS Xas
rwv Is&itwv. Orig. cont. Gels. lib. i. p. 44.

e Apol. cap. 5, 7, 21. h Ad Nat. lib. i. cap. 7.

1 Fuit enim de patria Bethlehem, et de domo David, sicut apud Romanes
in censu descripta est Maria, ex qua nascitur Christus. Adv. Judaeos. cap. 9.

k Aufer hinc, inquit, molestos semper Caesaris census. De carne Christi.
cap. 2. Sed et census constat actos sub Augusto nunc in Judaea per Sentium
Saturninum, apud quos genus ejus inquirere potuissent. Adv. Marc. lib. iv.
cap. 19. Tarn distincta fuit a primordio Judaea gens per tribus et populos, et
familias et domos, ut nemo facile ignorari de genere potuisset, vel de recentibus
Augustinianis censibus, adhuc tune fortasse pendentibus. Ibid. cap. 36.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 271

in some one of those many occasions in which they have
mentioned our Saviour's nativity, and the census which ac
companied it.

I shall proceed but one step farther to observe, that
Eusebitis has made no mention of any more than the cen
sus performed in Judea, neither in his history,1 nor in his
Chronicle.™

I cannot say that this interpretation is supported by any
ancient version. But Byneeus11 observes, that in an ancient
gloss, there is this explanation of it ; " [That all the world
should be taxed]" or surveyed ; not the orb of all the earth,
but the orb of Judea, and Syria.

If then the census or description, ordered by the decree
of Augustus at the time of our Saviour's nativity, was of the
land of Judea only, the silence of ancient historians is no
objection at all against St. Luke's account. There must
have been many surveys of provinces of the Roman empire
in the reign of Augustus, of which there is no notice taken
by any of the Roman or Greek authors now in our hands.

The only writer in whom we could expect any mention
of it is Josephus. Whether he has spoke of it or not will
be considered hereafter. But supposing at present, that
there is no notice at all taken of it by him, this is no objec
tion against St. Luke. It is not to be expected we should
find in one single historian, all the affairs that were trans
acted in his country. We have undoubted evidence of this
enrolment in the early testimonies of the Christian writers.
I have already exhibited more than enough of them. Jus
tin Martyr speaks of it in his Apology to the emperor and
the senate before the middle of the second century. Ter-
tullian mentions it in several of his pieces. There is scarce
any one occasional fact or circumstance relating to the his
tory of Jesus, which was more frequently and more publicly
mentioned by the Christian writers : and yet it was never
contested, that I know of, in all antiquity, not even by the
adversaries of the Christian religion. Julian speaks of it as
a thing universally known. I subjoin his words. * The
• Jesus, says he, whom you extol, was one of Caesar's sub-
' jects. If you make a doubt of it, I will prove it by and

1 Vid. Hist. Ecc. lib. i. c. m Ev Ty \y 'Hpo^a Kvprjvioc, VTTO rrje rrvyXrjTa

/3a\7;c a7r«<ra\/i«vo£ EIQ rrjv Isdaiav, airoypatyag CTTOHjaaro rwv saiuv Kai TCJV ot-
Kjjropwj/. p. 76. vid. et p. 200. n Hoc a nemine interpretum, quod qui-

dem ego sciam, animadversum esse, nisi in specimine Glossae Ordinariae, quod
Robertas Stephanus edidit, legimus. Octavius xlii. imperii suo anno, publico de-
creto edixit, ut universus orbis Judaeorum et Syriae describeretur ; et paulo post,
[ut censeretur totus orbis] sive describeretur : non quidem orbis terrarum, sed
orbis Judaeomm et Syriae. Bynaeus, De Natali Jesu Christi. p. 306.

272 Credibility of the Gospel History.

1 by : though it may be as well done now. For you say
' yourselves, that he was enrolled with his father and
' mother in the time of Cyrenius/0

I presume I have answered this objection : but it is upon
the supposition, that St. Luke speaks of a census or enrol
ment in Judea only. I have not taken up this interpreta
tion to avoid a difficulty, but because I really think it to be
St. Luke's meaning1. However, if St. Luke be supposed to
speak of a general census of the Roman empire, I own, that
the silence of antiquity would be a very great objection.
Nor is the difficulty much lessened by supposing this en
rolment was of persons only, and not of lands or goods.
The numbering the people was far from being the principal
design of a census of Roman citizens. But yet, oftentimes,
when an historian mentions a census, he gives very little
account of any thing' relating to it, beside the number of
citizens that was found. If ever the number of all the peo
ple of the Roman empire had been taken in the reign of
Augustus, it would have been a very great curiosity ; and
historians would have been very fond of gratifying their
readers with it. Though we have but few writers of those
times, yet it is with me unquestionable, that in some of those
we have, there would have been a particular account of so
remarkable an event, or at least many references to it :
whereas there are none at all.

II. St. Matthew says, that Jesus was born in the days of
Herod. Judea therefore was not at that time a Roman
province : and there could be no taxing made there by
virtue of a decree of Augustus.

This objection has been answered already. For it is evi
dent from what has been alleged from the Christian writers,
in the reply to the former objection, that there was some
census, description, or survey, made in Judea at the time of
our Saviour's nativity, by a decree of A ugustus. However,
that no scruples may remain in the minds of any from a
false notion of the state of Judea under Herod, I shall par
ticularly consider the matter of this second objection.

But 1 would first observe in general, that though we have
the word " taxing" in our version, " that all the world
should be taxed ; this taxing was first made ;" yet the
words used by St. Luke do not import a tax, or laying a
tax or duty upon a people. In the margin of our Bibles

0 'O irap vfj.iv KrjpvTTOfjLfvog Irj<r&£ I'IQ i}v rwv Kai«rapo£ vTrrjKoaiv' ti Se cnriff-
T£ire, fjiiicpov i/T£pov a7rofoi£a»" jiaXXov drj rjSr) XtytoOw' £>ar£ fJiev roi avrov

«7roypax//a<T0ai fjitra TS 7rctTpo£ Kai TTJQ [irjrpog CTTI Kvp^vis. Apud. Cyril. 1.
vi. p. 213. ed. Spanh.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2, considered. 273

we have the word " enrolled ;" and in most other transla
tions!? a word of like signification is used.

I must also premise, that some have thought that this
enrolment was to be only of names and persons; and that
all Augustus aimed at by this decree, was to know the
number of people inhabiting the Roman empire, with their
employments and conditions of life. Whitby paraphrases
these words thus : ' That all the world should be taxed :*
that is, * should have their names and conditions of life set
* down in court rolls, according to their families.'

Others have thought, that this decree obliged to a regis
try not only of the names of persons and their conditions of
life, but also of their goods and possessions ; and that in
short, it was a Roman census, which was now made, in
order to the people's paying taxes for the future, according
to the value of their estates. I own I am inclined to this
latter opinion ; and that St. Luke speaks only of a census
in Judea, as I have already declared.

Having premised these things, that we may find out
what kind of enrolment or registering was now ordered by
Augustus ; whether a decree of Augustus could be obliga
tory at this time upon the people of Judea ; and whether it
is likely there was a Roman census made there at this time ;
I shall consider these following particulars.

1. I shall explain the nature of a Roman census.

2. I shall consider the force of St. Luke's words.

3. I shall describe in general the state of Judea under
Herod.

4. I shall inquire what grounds there are to believe, that
a Roman census was made in Judea at this time.

1. I shall explain the nature of a Roman census. A cen
sus (as I take it) consisted of these two parts : first, the
account which the people gave in of themselves and their
estates ; and secondly, the value set upon their estates by
their censors, who took the account from them. The peo
ple did undoubtedly represent in some measure the value
of the things they entered ; but the censors seem to have
had the power of determining and settling the value.

There was indeed another thing which belonged to the
office of the censors at Rome, the censure or correction of
manners : but, as I suppose, that belonged only to a census
of Roman citizens, and that it was no part of a census of all

P Ut describeretur universus orbis. Haec descriptio prima facta est : Vers.
vulg. pour faire un denombrement — ce denombrement se fit. Moris, vers.
M. Le Clerc, L'Enfant, &c.

VOL. I. T

274 Credibility of the Gospel History.

the inhabitants of a province, or of a country subject to a
dependent prince, I take no notice of it here.

The Roman census was an institution of Servius Tullius,
the sixth king of Rome. Dionysius of Hallicarnassus gives
us this account of it; that ' he ordered all the citizens of
Rome to register their estates according to their value in
money, taking an oath, in a form he prescribed, to deliver
a faithful account according to the best of their knowledge,
specifying withal the name of their parents, their own age,
and the names of their wives and children, adding also
6 what quarter of the city, or what town in the country they
* lived in.'i

And after much the same manner do we find a Roman
census described in ther Fragments of the twelve tables,
and in the Roman s orators, * historians, and u lawyers. From
all whom it appears, the people were required to give in an
account of their names, their quality, employments, wives,
children, servants, and estates.

Beside what the people did, there seems to have been
something done by the censors more than the bare taking
the account the people gave in : that is, they were to deter
mine the value of each particular of their estates, and the
amount v of the whole ; and from this seems to have been
taken the name or title of this office, both in the w Latin and
in the x Greek language. For not only was the compass of
ground which any one possessed to be considered, but the
nature of it, and the profits it might yield : nor the number
only of slaves or servants which any one had, but also the

cnravrag Pw/iai8f airoKpafaaOai re Kai ripaaOai rag setae; ?rpog
6/J.oaavTag TOV vop,ifiov 6p/eoi>, ij [iijv T a\r)0r) Kai CCTTO TTUVTOQ ra
(Be\Ti<7& TtTifjirjGOat, Trarepwv re wv uai ypa$ovra£, mi t'lXiKiav TJV t%ovffi Sr)\av-
TCIQ, yvvaiKctQ rf. Kai vraidag ovofia^ovrag, Kai tv TIVI KaroiKamv tKazoi TY)Q
TroXewg TOTT(ftt tj 7ray<£> TTJG ^wpac, 7rpo<zi9tvTaQ- Dionys. Hal. Ant. Rom. 1.
iv. c. 15. p. 212. init. Huds. Edit.

r Censores populi civitates, soboles, familias, pecuniasque censento. Cic.
de Leg. lib. iii. cap. 3. s Jam (ut censoria3 tabulae

loquuntur) fabrum et procum audeo dicere, non fabrorum et procorum. Cic.
Orator, n. 156. * Ab hoc (Servio Tullio) populus

Romanus relatus in censum. — Summaque regis solertia ita est ordinata respub-
lica, ut omnia patrimonii, dignitatis, setatis, artium, officiorumque discrimina
in tabulas referrentur, ac si maxima civitas minimse domus diligentia contine-
retur. Florus, lib. i. cap. 6. vid. Liv. lib. i. cap. 42. et seq.

u Vid. Digesta Tit. de censibus. v In censu habendo

potestas omnis aestimationis habendaB, summaeque faciundae, censori permitti-
tur. Cic. in Ver. lib. ii. ri. 131.

w Censio aestimatio, unde Censores. Festus de verb. Sign. Censores ab re
appellati sunt. Liv. lib. iv. cap. 8. fin.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2, considered. 275

work? they were employed in, according to which their
service was to be valued. And therefore every one reckon
ed himself worth soz much as the censors valued his
estate at.

This power, which the censors had of rating* or valuing*
the estates of all persons, gave them an opportunity of com
mitting' injustice, in favouring" some and oppressing others.
For though there werea rules, by which they ought to re-
g'ulate their estimation of every particular ; and the supreme
censorsb were wont to issue out precepts to their under-
officers, enjoining- justice and equity in their posts ; yet if
the supreme censors were men of ill principles, very great
enormities often went unpunished. c

That the reader may have a complete idea of the design
of these enrolments among the Romans, at least so far as is
necessary to our purpose, 1 shall add here the account
which Dionysius has given of the census made by Laertius
the dictator, A. U. 258, before Christ, 496. Being chosen
dictator, * He immediately ordered that all, according to the
' excellent institution of ServiusTullius, should in theirseveral

* tribes give in an account of their estates, setting down the
' names of their wives and children, and their own age, and

* that of their children. All having in a short time offered
' themselves to be assessed, (for the penalty of neglect was
' no less than forfeiture of estate and citizenship ;) there

* were found to be one hundred and fifty thousand and
' seven hundred Romans at man's estate. After this, he
' separated those who were of military age from the elder ;
' and disposing those into centuries, he formed four bodies
1 of horse andd foot/ From this passage it appears, that

* y In servis deferendis observandum est, ut et nationes eorum, et officia, et
artificia specialiter deferantur. 1. iv. sect. 5. ff. de censibus.

z Censores dicti, quod rem suam quisque tanti sestimare solitus sit quantum
illi censuerint. Festus. V. Censores.

a Forma oensuali cavetur, ut agri sic in censum referantur, — arvum quod in
decem annos proximos satum erit, quod jugerum sit, — illam aequitatem debet
admitlere censitor, ut officio ejuscongruat, relevari eum, qui in publicis tabulis
delato modo frui certis ex causis non possit. Lib. iv. pr. eod.

b Edicis enim, te in decumanum, si plura sustulerit, quam debitum sit, in
octuplum judicium daturum esse. Cic. in Verr. 1. iii. n. 26.

c Sic census habitus est, te praetore, ut eo censu nullius civitatis respublica
posset administrari. Nam locupletissimi cujusque census extenuarant, tenuis-
simi auxerant. Ibid. lib. ii. n. 138.

d To Kpan^ov TWV VTTO 2tp«i8 TvXXia TH ^juorucwrara (3am\ecjg Kara<?aOfv-
rti)v vop.i[jiwv, Trpwrog eirtra£e 'Pwjwatoie aVaffi troirjaai, rt/iTjcmc; Kara QvXag
Twv /3twv tveyKtiv, 7rpo<rypa0orrac ywat/caiv /cat Tratdwv ovofiara, KO.I ri\iKiag
eavTwv TI Kai TLKVUV' ev o\ty^» St xpovy iravTuv rintjaafjievtov, Sia TO fityt

rr\v rt yap u<riav aTroXetrai r«g a7riiQt]<ravraQ tSei, KCU rrjv iroXi-
2

T

276 Credibility of the Gospel History.

the knowledge of the military strength of the state was in
tended in this institution, as well as the regulating the public
revenue. It was necessary to observe this here, that the
reader may the better judge of some arguments that follow.

2. We shall now consider the force and import of the
words St. Luke makes use of in his account of the matter
before us.

Now it must be allowed, that the verb made use of by St.
Luke in the first verse, " that all should be taxed," or en
rolled,6 is used by Greek authors for the making any kind
of entry or enrolment. Thus Servius Tullius observing
many Roman citizens to be in debt, ordered all of them,
who had not wherewithal to satisfy their creditors, to enter f
their names, and the sum they owed in public rolls ; that it
might be known what the whole amounted to, and provision
might be made for payment.

This word is likewise used concerning the enrolments
which were made when the Roman citizens gave in their
names, and enlisted themselves in the service of a general £

So that perhaps there may be some reason to question,
whether St. Luke intended not a bare entry or enrolment
made by the people of Judea of their names and conditions
of life, as many learned men have supposed.

But yet on the other hand it is certain, that the whole of
a census is oftentimes expressed, by the Greek authors, by
the words which St. Luke has used. Thus Dio Cassius,
speaking of Augustus's first census, says, ' in the same year
' he finished11 the enrolments :' hereby meaning the whole
of a census, including also the censure of manners, which
belonged to a census of Roman citizens. And in an
other place, when he particularly describes the office of a
censor, he says : * As censors, they [the emperors] inquire1
into our lives and manners, and make enrolments.' He in
tends therefore in this place the whole of a census, except
the correction of manners, by the noun, which St. Luke

TSiaV tTTTaicoaioig 7rX«8£ tvpeOrjffav 01 ev r)(3y 'Pcjfiatcjv TrevrficatSeKa

\itra. TSTO diaicpivaQ TSQ £%oj/ra£ rrjv ^partvaifiov ryXuaav UTTO TO)V 7rp£<r/3i/r£-

pwv K. r. X. Lib. v. c. 75. p. 324.

e A7Toypa0£cr0at iraffav rr\v oiK&ntvrjv (Avr^ 17 aTroypa^jj* AC. r. X.)

f A7roypa0£cr0ai KtXtvvctQ Tag V7ro%p£8£, ocrot ri]v TTITIV advvaroi ijaav tyv-

Xarmv TOIQ otytiXaat icai iroaov txa^oQ. Dionys. Hal. Lib. iv. c. 10. p. 207.
g "Svvvtpptov ctTroypa^o/ncvoi TS. Trpog r«£ fjyip,ovag ra ovojuara, fcai TOV Tpa-

rtwriKov OIIVWTIQ bp%ov. Dion. Hal. Lib. x. cap, 16. init.

h Ev <T 8V T(p TOTt TTCtpOVTl TUTf. CtXXtt OXTTTCp £101<TO £7Tpa^£, KCtt Tag CtTTOypa-

0ae e&TtXeae. Dio. Lib. liii. p. 496. C. ad A. U. C. 726. - vid. etiam p.
512. B. Kai avTuv (sc. Gallorum) /eat cnroypatyag tiroirjactTo, &c.

1 EK & Ta TifirjTeveiv, rag Tf (3i&Q KO.I rsc TpoTrsg irjfjKov t%iTa%&0i> Kai arro-
irotuvrat. Id. L. liii. p. 508. B. C.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2, considered. 277

makes use of in the second verse ; only it is in the plural
number.

Farther, St. Luke's narration contains in it so many cir
cumstances of a Roman census, that I cannot but think
there was at this time a proper census. The substance of
the decree was, that all the land should be enrolled. Again,
" All went to be taxed," or enrolled. And he intimates
very plainly, that Mary also was enrolled with Joseph. All
these are particulars extremely agreeable to the nature of a
Roman census.

Though therefore the words in St. Luke, and especially
the verb in the first verse, are used for the making of any
kind of entry, yet the whole relation obliges us to under
stand it concerning this particular kind of enrolment.

And St. Luke's words appear to be extremely proper.
The edicts for a census seem to have generally run in this
form, expressing the duty of the people. There is in
Cicero the title of such an edict, published by Verres praetor
of Sicily, when a census was to be made in that province.
It is called an edict concerning the enrolment.**

In a census of the citizens of Rome, the number of the
people was always taken and observed, but there was a
census made of goods and lands as well as of persons.
This appears from passages already quoted from Dionysius
of Halicarnassus and others. And Livy says expressly,
that the very design of the institution was, that people
might contribute to the expenses of the state, not by the
head, but in proportion to their estates.1

And for aught that appears, the same views were pursued
in the assessments made in the provinces. Tacitus indeed
says, that the Batavi paid no tribute to the Romans, and
furnished the state with arms andm men only upon occasion.
And some may be disposed to infer from hence, that there
might be enrolments made in such a province, of the names
of the people and their conditions of life, in order to know
what number of troops it might furnish the state with.

k Edictum de Profcssione. Cic. in Verr. lib. iii. n. 26.

1 Ut, quemadmodum Numa divini auctor juris fuisset, ita Servium condito-
rem omnis in civitate discriminis, ordinumque, quibus inter gradus dignitatis
Fortunceque aliquid interlucet, posted fama ferrent. Censum enim instituit,
rem saluberrimam tanto futuro imperio j ex quo belli pacisque munia non
viritim, sedpro habitu pecuniarum, ficrent. Liv. lib. i. cap. 42.

m Nee opibus Romanis, societate validiorum attriti, viros tantum armaque
imperio rainistrant. Tacit. Hist. lib. iv. cap. 12. Nam nee tributis contem-
nuntur, nee publicanus atterit, exempti oneribus et collationibus ; et tantum
in usum proeliorum sepositi, velut tela atque arma, bellis reservantur. Id. de
Morib. Germ. cap. 29.

278 Credibility of the Gospel History.

This is very possible, and I think not unlikely : though
I have not yet seen any particular instance of it referred
to by learned men upon this occasion. Some however do
suppose, that the survey of Judea at this time was made by
Augustus with this very view." But I believe Judea was
the last place in which the Romans would look for soldiers.
The Jews had formerly served the kings of Syria and
Egypt in their wars ; they had likewise been in the Roman
armies. But now they had scruples about serving heathens
in this way : and all of them who were in the service of the
Romans had been discharged in form.0 Their own kings
kept foreign troops in Judea. After the conquest of Egypt,
Augustus made Herod a present of four hundred Gauls,
that had been the life-guard of Cleopatra queen of Egypt.?
And in the description of Herod's funeral solemnity, Jose-
phus reckons up three distinct corps of foreign soldiers,
Thracians, Germans, and Gauls. 1 Indeed the Jews were at
this time so self-willed and tumultuous, that, as it seems,
no prince was very forward to put weapons into their
hands.

I recollect but one instance, that looks like a design of
any of the Roman emperors to take Jews into their service.
This was in the reign of Tiberius, who, as Suetonius says,
sent the Jewish youth (who were at Rome) under a sort of
military oath into the more unhealthful provinces. r But
this seems to me to have been more like sending them to
the mines, than taking- them into military service. We are
certain the Jews did afterward pay tribute to the Romans :
and perhaps I may hereafter make it appear they were now,
and had been before this, tributary to the Romans. It is
therefore much more likely, that surveys should be made
in Judea with a view to tribute than to military service.

Nor do I perceive what learned men gain by this. They
think it dishonourable to Herod to have the goods of
his subjects enrolled and rated by a Roman officer for the
paying of tribute. But where lies the difference between
this, and the numbering and entering his people, in order to
demand for soldiers as many men as his country could af
ford 1 If indeed this enrolment of his people had been made
by Herod, by his own authority, and at his own discretion,

n Breviario igitur quod meditabatur Augustus, quantum militum Juda?a sup-
peditare posset, includi debuit. Basnage. Ann. Polit. Ecc. ante D. 5. n. 11.

0 Joseph. Ant. 1. xiv. c. 10. sect. 12. ' p Id. de B. J.

lib. i. p. 1006. 15. « Ibid. cap. ult. sub fin.

. r Judaeorum juventutem, per speciem sacramenti, in provincias gravioris
cceli distribuit. Vit. Tiber, c. 36. vid. et Tacit. Ann. ii. c. 85.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2, considered. 279

in order to furnish the emperor with a certain quota of men
upon occasion, Herod's honour had been saved. But this is
not St. Luke's account. " There went out a decree from
Csesar Augustus, that all the land should be taxed." And
by virtue of this decree of Augustus, all Herod's subjects,
men and women, in every part of his dominions, were en
rolled with great exactness, and as it seems with great ex
pedition. And the order of enrolment must have been very
pressing. I do not suppose indeed, that the Virgin was
obliged at all by the decree to go to Bethlehem ; but I
think that Joseph would not have gone thither, when she
was so near the time of her delivery, if the enrolment
would have admitted of a delay, or could have been done
at another time.

And that this enrolment was performed by some Roman
officer, as well as ordered by an imperial decree, may be
very fairly concluded from the parenthesis, ver. 2, since
the main intention of it is to distinguish it from another,
which was certainly made by a Roman officer.

Mr. Whiston indeed says, ' It is very probable that the
' enrolment of the Jews was made by Herod, at the request
' of* Augustus.' It would have been to Mr. Whiston's
purpose to give a few specimens of the style of Augustus,
or of the republic toward some of their dependent nominal
kings. But it would not have signified much in this case,
because St. Luke does not say, " there went out" a request
" from Caesar Augustus," but a " decree ;" and therefore we
should have been still obliged to call it a " decree ;" and I
believe we may do so very safely. We shall find by and
by, from the history of Herod, that it is very unlikely that
Augustus should have sent Herod any requests about this
time.

Again : Mr. Whiston supposes * that Herod the king of

* the Jews was requested or required to get him [Augustus]

* a like exact account of the Jewish nation, as he had al-

* ready attained of the rest of the Roman empire.' But if
this had been all that Augustus did, namely, requiring or
requesting this of Herod, then Herod must have issued a
command or order to all his people to enrol themselves.
But how came St. Luke to mention Augustus's requirement
or request to Herod, and call it a decree too, and yet say
nothing of Herod's order ? I think, St. Luke does plainly
represent the people of Judea in motion for enrolling them
selves in their several cities in obedience to Augustus's de»
cree ; and he says nothing of Herod.

• Short View of the Harm, of the Four Evan. p. 149.

280 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Some have thought that this enrolment was the effect of
Augustus's curiosity. And some expressions of Claudius,1
in his speech to the senate about giving the freedom of the
city to the Gauls, have been alleged by learned men as a
proof, that assessments were sometimes made in the provinces
purely out of curiosity. For he says, that he had found a
census to be a very difficult work, even when nothing more
was intended by it, than to know what his estate (or riches)
was. But even from these words it appears, that an ac
count was taken of the estates of the people, as well as their
names and conditions of life. And the censors must have
made an estimation : otherwise, the value could never have
been known with any certainty. Besides I think, that all
the emperor intends here is, that he could easily conceive
with what difficulty a census was at first introduced into a
province, when even now a fresh census was seldom made
without some disturbance. And as a proof of this, he in
stances in the rebellion which the first census of Gaul pro
duced in that country." And though he calls this renewing
a census, only an enquiry, that his estate or revenue might
be publicly known, yet certainly the tribute to be paid
according to the census is not to be excluded. Princes do
not, nor is it reasonable they should, reckon their people
only all their riches. The revenue arising from the tribute
or taxes which they pay, is certainly a part of the prince's
riches. The emperor's meaning therefore is, that the
making- of a census now is not the imposing any new hard
ship : the great use of them is to preserve exactness and
order in the state of the revenues ; and yet they give peo
ple uneasiness : how much more must they have done so
formerly ?

Moreover, the taxing afterwards made in Judea was cer
tainly a census of goods as well as persons. And yet when
St. Luke makes mention of it in Garnaliel'sv speech, he uses
the same word he does here.

All the first Christians thought this was a census of goods.
It is apparent that Justin Martyr thought so, in that he tells

* Et quidem cum ad census novo turn opere et inadsueto Galliis ad bellum
avocatus esset. Quod opus quam arduum sit nobis, nunc cum maxime,
quamvis nihil ultra quam ut publice notae sint facultates nostrae, exquiratur,
nimis magno experimento cognoscimus. Vid. Lips. Excurs. ad Tacit. Ann.
xi. A.

u Livy speaks likewise of this disturbance. Tumultus, qui ob censum ex-
ortus erat, compositus. Epitome libri 137. Liviani.

v Mfra TSTOV ave^rj ladag 6 Ta\i\aiog tv raiQ r}p,epai£ rt)C, aTroypa^j/g. Act.
v. 37.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2, considered. 281

the emperor and the senate, it was made by their first pro
curator in Judea. Tertullian makes no scruple to call it
very plainly a census. And Eusebius in his Chronicle says
expressly, that enrolments were then made of goods as well
as of persons. All these considerations, if I mistake not,
render it highly probable that, according to St. Luke, there
was now a proper census made in Judea throughout the ter
ritories of Herod.

But though it be supposed that here was now a census
made, yet a census is not a tax. Assessments were certain
ly made, that tribute might be paid according to them ; and
where a census was made, a tribute might be required ; but
yet it might be forborne or remitted. And whether any tri
bute was raised upon this census or not, I leave at present
undetermined.

Supposing the affair St. Luke gives us an account of to
have been a Roman census, it is possible two or three in
quiries may be here made. (1.) What occasion was there
for Joseph to enrol himself, since he was a poor man ; as
may be concluded from the lesser offering which the virgin
made at the temple for her purification.

I answer, that it was the custom in a Roman census, for
persons of all employments and characters to enter them
selves, as appears from the descriptions given of it in the
authors which I have before quoted. And though Joseph
was not a rich man, it does not follow he had nothing.
However, whatever his condition was, the edict obliged
him to give in an account of himself to the officers ; unless
there was a particular exception made, and only such per
sons were required to appear who were possessed of estates
to such a value. Augustus seems once to have made such
a census of the Roman citizens. w But that this was not the
usual method is evident, because this particular circum
stance of that census is mentioned as somewhat extraordi
nary.

(2.) Since Joseph lived in Galilee, how came he to go up
from thence to be registered at Bethlehem ?

To this I answer, that possibly he might be obliged to it
by virtue of some clause in the edict. Ulpian says,x that

AVTOQ tie onroypatpctQ TWV tv ry IraXip KOTOIKSVTIOV, icai fir] t\arr<j>

uaiav Kffcrjj/itvwv, tiroirjffaTo. Tsg yap affOtvt^tp&g, Tag re £?a> Ttjg
IraXiag oiKsvra^, 8K i]vayKaatv aTroypa^aoOai, deiaaQ pr) vt wrtpKrwot TI rapa%-
OevrtQ. Dio. 1. Iv. p. 557. B.

x Is vero, qui agrum in alia civitate habet, in ea civitate profited debet, in
qua ager est. Agri enim tributum in earn civitatem debet levare, in cujus
territorio possidetur, 1. iv. sect. 2. ff. de Censibus.

282 Credibility of the Gospel History.

persons ought to enrol themselves in the place where their
estate lies. Though Joseph was not rich, yet he might have
some small inheritance in or near Bethlehem, and might be
obliged to go thither upon that account. But this I do not
insist upon here.

St. Luke gives us this reason of his going to Bethlehem :
" because he was of the house and lineag'e of David," v. 4.
It is probable, that this journey was owing' to the custom
of the Jews, who, whenever they were numbered, entered
themselves according to their tribes and families. If against
this it be objected, That the Jews had lost the registers of
their families before this time; I answer, that this does not
appear. They were reckoned by them to be of great im
portance ; and it is not unlikely that many, if not most of
them, had the registers of their families till the final ruin of
their state and constitution, and perhaps for some time after
it. Anna is said to be the " daughter of Phanuel, of the
Tribe of Asher" Luke ii. 36. " Barnabas was a Levite,"
Acts iv. 36. Paul affirms, that he was of the Tribe of
Benjamin, Rom. xi. 1. Phil. iii. 5. And these two were
born in foreign countries, the one in Cyprus, the other at
Tarsus.

Josephus, the Jewish historian, having mentioned the time
of his birth, and the names of several of his ancestors, says ;

* Thus have I given an account of my family, as 1 found it

* in the public records.' y It is true, Josephus was of the
race of the priests, and their registers might be kept with
greater care and exactness than others : but it is evident,
from what he says of the marriages of the priests, that the
registers of other families were in being likewise. * Every
' priest,' says he, * among us is obliged to marry a woman
' of his own nation, and not so much to regard money or
6 any other advantages, but to make an exact inquiry into
' her descent, and to accept of no account but what is well

* attested. This is done not in Judea only, but in all places ;

* wherever there is any part of our nation, this law relating
' to the marriages of the priests is most carefully observed ;

* I mean in Egypt and Babylon, and every other part of the

* world in which any of our priests live.' z

y Ttjv [isv sv TH ytvuQ ry/iwv ^ia^o%7?v, w'c tv rat£ Srjfjioffiai^ &Xroi£ aveye-
ypaniitvriv tiipov, ourwg 7rapan0f^at. Joseph, in Vit. init.

z Aft yap TOV fjitTt^ovTa TI}Q hpoffvvt)<; &, b^iotQvsQ yvvaiKog 7rai$o7roi£<70ae»
KO.I fir) TTjOOf ^pyf/iara JUTJ^C Tag aXXaf cnrofiXtireiv rifjiag, a\Xa TO ytvog t%era-
Z,uv, IK TWV ap%atajv \ap,(3avovra rr\v lialoyr]V> fcai 7roXA«£ Trapatrxofjitvov
KCU ravra Trparro/itv s JJLOVOV tir a,VTi\Q Is^atac,-, aXX' OTTS TTOTC
ra ytvug e^iv ry/zwv, KT^CKSI TO aicpifleg a7ro<rw£erai TOIQ itptvai TTfpt Tag
K. T. X. Cont. Apion. 1. i. sect. 7.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2, considered. 283

(3.) What necessity was there for the Virgin Mary to go
to Bethlehem? Surely every master of a family was not
obliged, by a Roman census, to appear before the officer,
with his wife, children and servants, if he had any.

I answer, that I know not of any obligation she was under,
by virtue of Augustus's edict, to go to Bethlehem at this
time : but yet Joseph and Mary might choose it ; and they
might have very good reasons for it that we are unacquaint
ed with. St. Luke says, ch. ii. 41, 42, " Now his parents
went to Jerusalem every year, at the feast of the passover.
And when he was twelve years old, they went up to Jeru
salem, after the custom of the feast." Arid yet by the law
of Moses, the males only were obliged to appear before God
at the great feasts. And many learned men are of opinion,
that our Saviour did not go up to Jerusalem till this pass-
over, (which St. Luke here speaks of,) when he was twelve
years of age : though his parents, Mary, as it seems, as well
as Joseph, had gone up to Jerusalem every year ; that is,
from their last settlement in Galilee, after their return from
Egypt.

3. I shall now give a general description of the state and
condition of Judea under Herod, that we may be able to
judge, whether a Roman census could be made in it by
virtue of a decree of Augustus.

The Roman empire extended at this time to all the most
considerable countries in the known world, whether situated
in Europe, Asia, or Africa. Beside those countries which
were properly called provinces, and were governed by offi
cers sent from Rome, with the title of presidents, praetors,
or proconsuls, there were other countries governed by
kings, tetrarchs, or dynasts, dependent upon the Roman
state.

In the state and condition of these dependent princes,
there was a considerable difference. Some few received
their crown from the emperor, and acknowledged a de
pendence, but paid no tribute ;a among the rest, who were
in a more proper subjection, some were called friends of the
emperor, or the Roman state. This was undoubtedly a very
great honour, especially when conferred in form.b These
friends of the Romans furnished them with part of their troops,

a 'He [Apjueviag] 'Pw/zaioi tuc ap^«<Ti ptv eg 0ops KO[j.idr]V, avroi fa UVTOIQ
cnroStiKwxffi r«£ (3cLfft\tiaQ. Appian. in Prsef. init.

b Cognitis dehinc Ptolemaei per id bellum studiis, repetilus ex vetusto mos,
missusque e senatoribus qui scipionem eburnum, togam pictam, antiqua
munera patrum, daret, regemque, et socium, atque amicum appellaret. Tacit.
Ann. lib. iv. cap. 26. vid. et aliud exemplum apud Dionys. Hal. lib. v. cap. 35.
p. 291. • --u

284 Credibility of the Gospel History.

or with sums of money upon particular occasions ; or made
presents to the emperor and his ministers when needful ;
that is, they paid tribute in the genteelest way. Others
were more properly tributary, and were obliged to the pay
ment of certain sums of money ; but it is generally supposed,
that they raised it themselves among their people by their
own officers. But I suspect, that many of those princes,
called friends, were properly tributary, and that the empe
ror had an officer in the territories of most of them, who
took care of his revenue. Beside these, there were (if I
mistake not) some countries under the government of de
pendent kings, in which a tribute was raised in the way of
a Roman census.

That Herod was a dependent prince, I think was never
denied. He obtained the kingdom of Judea at first by
virtue of a decree of the Roman c senate ; and was assisted
in taking possession of it by Roman troops, commanded
by their ownd officers. Augustus gave him leave to no
minate for his successor, which of his sons he pleased. But
yet in his last will there was a clause, by which the final
determination of all was submitted to the will and pleasure
of the emperor. And after his death, his sons were obliged
to go to Rome,6 to obtain the grant and confirmation of
Augustus, before they dared to take possession of the ter
ritories assigned them by their father.

That Herod was tributary to Augustus, immediately be
fore his death, seems evident from the sentence pronounced
by the emperor, after he had considered Herod's will. * To
Archelaus were given,' says Josephus, * Idumea, and Ju
dea, and the country of the Samaritans. These were eased
of a fourth part of their tribute, Caesar decreeing them this
relief, because they had not joined with the other people
in their late disturbances.^ I think it most reasonable to
understand this of a tribute paid, or to be paid, not to He
rod or Archelaus, but to the emperor. If the Samaritans
were tributary to Csesar, the Jews were so likewise. It is
plain, these were not more favoured than the former ; and
they were both equally subject to Herod and Archelaus.

That Herod had been always tributary to the Roman
empire, may be inferred from what Agrippa the younger
says to the Jews, in his speech to dissuade them from the

c Joseph, de Bell. lib. i. cap. 14. fin. d Ibid. cap. 18.

e De Bell. lib. ii. cap. 2. { Ta de Ap^tXa^ GWTtXsvTa.

I$8juata, Tf. teat Ig&ua, TO re "SiafnapEiTiKOv' Terapra /*£ps£ ovroi TWV tyopwv Traps-
AfXvvro, KaKTapof CLVTOIQ K&tyiaiv ^qtyiGafJievs, dia TO ^ir\ Gvvcnro<zr]aai Ty \onry
7r\r)0vi. Joseph. Ant. 1. xvii. cap. 13. sect. 4. vid. et de Bell. lib. ii. cap. 6.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2, considered. 285

war. * At this time,' says he, * the desire of liberty is un-

* reasonable. It had been much better to have maintained

* it with vigour formerly. — — Then all ought to have been,

* done that was possible, to have kept out the Romans,
' when Pompey first entered into this land. But our ances-

* tors, and their kings, superior to you in wealth, in strength,
' and conduct, yielded to a small part of the Roman power.

* And you now, the hereditary subjects of the Romans, at-

* tempt to resist their whole empire.' e And Josephus, in his
speech to the Jews besieged in Jerusalem, to persuade them
to surrender to Titus, plainly dates the beginning of the
Jewish servitude to the Romans, from Pompey's conquest
of Judea.h It may be concluded from hence, that from that
time the Jews were tributary to the Romans. Subjection
and servitude must needs imply the paying of tribute.

Appian mentions Herod king of the Idumeans and Sama
ritans among the other kings, who, according to Mark An
tony's direction, were to bring in a certain prescribed
tribute.1 Antony and Herod were always very good friends,
and it cannot be supposed that Herod was better used by
Augustus, than he had been by Antony.

In the story of the difference between Herod and Sylleeus
the Arabian, which difference seems to have arose about
three years before Herod's death, and to have continued a
year or two at least, if not as long as Herod lived, there is
a passage that deserves to be observed in this place. ' Syl-
1 Iseus, moreover, bribed Fabatus, Caesar's procurator, and
' employed him against Herod. But Herod, by a larger
' sum of money, drew off Fabatus from Syllosus, and by him

* required the performance of those things which Ccesar had
6 ordered [to be done by Syllseus.] However, Syllaeus

* went on in his old way, performed none of those things ;

* and moreover accused Fabatus to Caesar, saying, that he
4 was a procurator more in Herod's interests than the em-

g AXXa fjirjv Toye vvv eXtvOtpiag eTriQvp,eiv awpov, Seov virep TS fttj^e a7ro/?a-
\stv avrrjv ayam£e<T0ai Trporfpov* — TOTE yap sv fxp^v travra virep TS fj,tj
StZaaQai ' Pw/taisg TTOUIV, ore TIJV apxrjv £7rs(3aivt rrjg %ojpa£ o HofJL-miiog' aXX'
01 fiev iifitTtpoi Trpoyovot, Kai 01 /3aa-iX«i£ avruv, /cat ^pr;/ia(7i KCII sia^aai Kai ^v^aig
aptivov vfidjv TroXXy fiiaKtifjitvoi, TTpof jMoipav oXtyjjv TIJG "Pwjiiaiwv Svvafj.t(j)g
SK avTf.vxpv' VIIIIQ de, ol TO \itv viraKSf.iv e/c SiadoxrjQ 7rapti\r)(j>oTeg — trpOQ
O\TJV avOiffTaaOf. TTJV 'Pw/zaiwv rjyt}Ji,oviav. Joseph, de Bell. lib. ii. cap. 16.
p. 1085, 1086.

h HoQiv & »;p^a/u,£0a ^sXftag, ap' 8%t fK ^afftcjQ TWV TTpoyovwv, ore 17 Api-
<?oj3&\8 Kai 'Ypjcavs /uavia, K«t )) irpoQ aXXjjXeg tptg, llofjiirrfiov nrrjyaye ry
TroXft Kat 'Pb)fj,aioiQ virtTa&v o 9£oe TSQ 8Y d^isg fXtvOepiag. Id. ib. 1. v. c. ix.
p. 1242. fin.

1 ITJJ 8s iroi Kai fiaaiXsag SQ ^oKtjua<rif v, STTI QopoiQ apa rtray/wf VOIQ'
^£ <cai Sa/iapewv, 'Hpw^qv. Appian, de Bell. Civ. 1. v. p. 1135.

286 Credibility of the Gospel History.

6 peror's.'k By procurator can be meant no other than an
officer that took care of the emperor's revenue ; and the
nature of the charge seems to imply, that Fabatus had a
trust under the emperor in Herod's dominions. This indeed
may be questioned, because that afterwards, Syllseus having
killed Fabatus, Aretas, the king of Arabia, prosecuted
Syllseus at Rome for the murder of Fabatus, as well as for
other crimes committed by him.1 And from hence it may
be inferred by some that Fabatus was rather an officer in
Arabia. Let it be so. However, here is a proof, that the
emperor had a procurator to take care of his tribute or re
venue in the country of a dependent prince : for such was
the king of Arabia. And it is not impossible, that Fabatus
might be concerned in both those kingdoms, of Judea and
Arabia.

Upon the whole then, Herod was always a dependent,
tributary prince. Whether he was at last obliged to sub
mit to a census, will be the subject of enquiry under the
next head.

All that I would show farther here is, that a census was not
inconsistent with the rights allowed to these dependent
princes, according to the Roman constitution. This is

fenerally denied, therefore some proof must be given of it :
ut it cannot be expected, that I should produce many ex
amples of a census in dependent kingdoms : partly, because
the Roman historians never take any notice of these things,
unless they are attended with some accidents that render
them remarkable : and partly, because the Romans had
several ways of raising tribute ; and a census, which was
the most disagreeable way of all, was not used in all those
countries that were properly provinces.

After the battle of Philippi, in which Brutus and Cassius
were defeated, Mark Antony went over into Asia, and
coming to Ephesus, summoned the states of the nations
thereabout to give him a meeting. In a speech he made to
these states, among other things, he tells them : * Your king
* Attains bequeathed his kingdom to us by testament. Our
' government has been milder than his was ; for we remit-
' ted the taxes you had been wont to pay to him, till men
' of turbulent spirits arose amongst us, and laid us under

k HtiactQ dt [SuXXaiogJ 7ro\\oi£ xprjfjiaffi <&a/3a.Tov TOV "Kaiaapog
v%pr]TO (3or]9(f) /cat /caO1 'Hpw^s* TrXeiova Se Sag "Hpwfo^, a^i^rjffi TI a?ro S
3>a/3aroj/, jcat Si avra ra KfXevaQevTa VTTO ~K.aicrapo£ eiatTrpaTTtv' o dt,
cnrodag, tn KOI /ear/jyojoti 3>a/3ar« Trpog Kawapa, dioiKrjTrjv tivat \eywv, a TCJV
'

£Keiva, T(uv Se 'Hpw&j ffVfjKpepovrwv. Joseph, de Bell. lib. i. cap. 29. p. 1030.
v. 21. > Vid. Joseph. Ant. lib. xvii. cap. 3.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2, considered. 287

* a necessity of demanding tribute of you. And even then

* we did not impose it upon you in the way of a census,

* that we might collect it with less hazard and trouble to
' ourselves ; and we required only the annual payment of a

* sum of money out of the produce of your country.'"1 In
the conclusion they agreed to pay a whole nine years' tri
bute in two years' time. The battle of Philippi was fought,"
A. U. 712, Attalus died,0 A. U. 621 : so that Asia (Propria)
had been a province 90 years, and yet they had not any
census among them. It is not likely, therefore, that we
should meet with many instances of a census made in de
pendent kingdoms.

Tacitus, however, has given us one instance : ' About

this time,' says he, * the Cilicians, subject to Archelaus the

Cappadocian, P being required to enrol themselves in our

way, and to pay tribute accordingly, withdrew themselves

into the fastnesses of mount Taurus ; and by the advantage

of the situation, maintained themselves against the weak

forces of the king; till Marcus Trebellius came in to his

assistance, from Vitellius president of Syria, with four

thousand Roman soldiers, and a body of auxiliaries.'^

By Cilicia I here understand, not Cilicia the plain,

[Cilicia Campestris,] which had been a Roman province

Jong before this ; but Cilicia the Rugged, [Aspera,] which

had been annexed by Augustus to the kingdom of Cappa-

docia.r It is true, that upon the death of old Archelaus,

A. U. 770, A. D. 17,s the kingdom of Cappadocia was re

duced to the state of a* province; and this disturbance,

which Tacitus here speaks of, is placed by him in A. U.

789, A. D. 36. u But Tacitus has no where said, that this

Cilicia was made a province. If it had, he must have known

it, and could not have spoke of it as he does here. He say.*,

m ETTH $6 tdsrjfftv, a ?rpo£ ra rifirj^ara vpiv (.TrtGriKa^itv, <*>g av
Svvov Qopov e/cXeyoi/ufr, a\\a jutpj; fytpuv TUV tKa^ore Kapirtov
Appian. de Bell. Civ. lib. v. p. 1074.

* Vid. Petavii Rationarium Temporura, Part. i. lib. iv. cap. 20.

0 Vid. ibid. cap. 14. P Or, that had been subject
to Archelaus the Cappadocian.

q Per idem tempus Clitarum natio Cappadocia Archelao subjecta, quia nos
trum in modum deferre census, pati tributa adigebatur, in juga Tauri montis
abscessit ; locorumque ingenio sese contra regis imbelles copias tutabatur j
donee M. Trebellius legatus, a Vitellio preside Syriae cum quatuor millibus
legionariorum, et dilectis auxiliis missus, duos colles, quos barbari insederant,
operibus circumdedit : et erumpere ausos, ferro cseteros, siti ad deditionem
coegit. Tacit. Annal. lib. vi. cap. 41.

r Vid. Strabonem, lib. xiv. p. 987. D. 8 C. Ccelio L. Pomponio Coss.

1 Regnum in provinciam redactum est. Tacit. Ann. lib. ii. cap. 42.
u Q. Plautio et Sext. Papinio Coss.

288 Credibility of the Gospel History.

that the people maintained themselves in their fastnesses
against the king's weak forces, till a general arrived from
Vitellius with a reinforcement of Roman soldiers. If it had
been a province, he would have said, that the people had
been too hard for the troops which the prsefect had with
him. And this account is in the main confirmed by several
other historians, who say, that this Cilicia was governed by
kings till the time of Vespasian. v

Nor is it very hard to trace the fortune of this people,
from the beginning of the reign of Caligula to Vespasian.
For Dio says, that Caligula gave the maritime Cilicia,
(which was another name of this country,) to Antiochus, as
an accession to his kingdom of Comagene.w Before Cali
gula died, he took it away from him ; by Claudius it was
again restored to the same Antiochus.x And from an ac
count which Tacitus has given of another tumult of this
people, A. U. 805, A. D. 52, [Fausto Sulla et Salvio
Othone Coss.] they appear to have been then subject to
Antiochus.y And it is likely they continued under him, till
it was made a province by Vespasian ; because Comagene
was at that time reduced to a province, as appears from
Suetonius and Eutropius, already quoted ; and from Jose-
phus, who says that this Antiochus was dispossessed of all
his dominions in the fourth year of Vespasian.2

The only difficulty is, who they were subject to, when
this census was ordered to be made among them in the lat
ter end of Tiberius's reign ; for by the manner in which the
first words of this passage of Tacitus are quoted by Cardi
nal Noris,a and by Pagib from him, they must have under
stood, by Archelao subjecta, the people that had been
subject to Archelaus, that is, to Archelaus the king of
Cappadocia. However, Lipsius and Muretusc understand

v Item Thraciam, Ciliciam, et Comagenen, ditionis regiae usque ad id tern-
pus in provinciae formam redegit. Sueton. in Vespas. cap. 8. Item Thraciam,
Ciliciam, Tracheam, et Comagenem, quae sub regibus amicis fuerant, in pro-
vinciarum formam redegit [Vespasianus]. Eutrop. 1. vii. c. 19.

w 'O yap AVTIOXV TS Ai/rio^s TTJV Ko/i/nay^v^v, r/v 6 Trarrjp avrs £<rxf» KCII
TrpoGtTi teat TO. Trapa9a\aa0ia rrjg KiAiKiaf ^8f* Dio. 1. lix. p. 645. D.

x Kai /.tera TSTO rip re Avno^tf) TY\V Ko/Jjuayrjvfjv cnrtdwKtv o yap Taiog, Kai
irep avroQ ol Bag avTrjr, aty'yprjTO' Id. lib. Ix. p. 670. A.

y Nee multo post agrestium Cilicum nationes, quibus Clitarum cognomen-
turn, ssepe et alias commotae, tune Trosobore duce, montes asperos castris
cepere. — Dein rex ejus orae Antiochus, blandimentis adversus plebem, fraude
in ducem, cum barbarorum copias dissociasset, Trosobore paucisque primori-
bus interfectis, caeteros dementia composuit. Tacit. Ann. lib. xii. cap. 55.

z Vid. Joseph, de Bell. Jud. lib. vii. cap. 7.

a Noris Cenotaph. Pis. Dis. ii. p. 308. b Appar. ad

Annal. num. 127. c In loc.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 289

Tacitus to say, that they were then subject to Archelaus, a
son of the former Archelaus, who died at Rome, A. U. 770.

I am under no obligation to determine this matter,
because it is the same thing' to my purpose, whether they
were now subject to the king* of Comagene, or some other
dependent prince, or whether they were subject to a son of
the old Archelaus, king of Cappadocia; the imbelles regis
copiae [the king's weak forces] proving they were under a
king. But it seems to me most natural to interpret Tacitus
as Lipsius does : the imbelles regis copise imply that a king
had been mentioned before, and therefore Archelao sub-
jecta cannot be very fairly understood to mean no more
than a description of these Cilicians, to distinguish them
from others of that name.

Tiberius had been indeed very angry with old Archelaus;
but nevertheless he might be willing, when he had made
his kingdom of Cappadocia a province, to give one of his
sons this small appendage of it. This Cilicia was far from
being any strong temptation ; the country was mountainous,
and the people were apt to turn to robbery or piracy, and
for these reasons they had been given before by Augustus
to the above-mentioned Archelaus. d Cappadocia had been
a very rich booty to Tiberius : upon its being made a pro
vince, by the ready money and effects of Archelaus and the
revenues of the country, such sums came into the public
treasury of the Romans, that their tax, called the hundredth,
fell immediately to a two hundredth.6 We may therefore
suppose, that by Archelaus here is meant a son of the former
king of Cappadocia, though he be an obscure person ; and
the weakness of the king's forces is an argument, that he
was no considerable prince, and that these people were his
only subjects.

Though here be but one example, it is sufficient for my
design. I believe it was disgraceful to a prince, to have a
census made in his dominions : however, Tacitus does not
insinuate, that there was any injustice in it, or that it
was absolutely inconsistent with the rights indulged to de
pendent princes : and the king, to whom this people were
subject, supported this census as far as he was able.

4. I am now to enquire, whether we have any reasons to
believe, that there was a census made in Judea at this time.

We can hope for no light in this matter from any author
but Josephus, except the notice which the Christian writers

d Vid. Strab. 1. xiv. p. 987. D. e Regnum ejus in provinciara

redactum est : fructibusque ejus levari posse centesimae vectigal, professus
Caesar, ducentesimam in posterum statuit. Tacit. Ann. lib. ii. cap. 42.

VOL. I. U

290 Credibility of tlic Gospel History .

have taken of it. If we will rely upon them, I think the
point is decided already : but at present we will lay aside
their testimonies, and confine our enquiries to Josephus.

That Herod was always tributary, has been proved. I
apprehend, that toward the latter end of his reign there was
some alteration made in his circumstances, for the worse.
In order to judge of the evidence there is for it, we must
trace the history of Herod's affairs about this time.

Obodas was now king of Arabia, and Syllaeus his chief
officer under him, who indeed administered all affairs of
that country with almost kingly authority. Herod had lent
Obodas a considerable sum of money : when the time of
payment came, Herod demanded the money, but in vain.
Moreover a band of robbers had infested Herod's dominions,
and carried off several of his subjects, and were afterwards
sheltered by Obodas and Sylloeus in Arabia. These differ
ences between the two courts of Judea and Arabia were
brought before Saturninus and Volumnius, the emperor's
chief officers in Syria, the neighbouring province. Here it
was stipulated, that Herod should surrender to Obodas all
the Arabians he had in his custody, and that Obodas should
release all Jewish prisoners, and pay the money he owed in
thirty days' time/ But when that time was expired, none
of these conditions were performed on the part of the Ara
bians ; and Syllseus, full of resentment against Herod, sails
for Rome. The terms agreed upon not having been per
formed by Obodas, Herod, with the consent of Saturninus
and Volumnius, inarches into Arabia, and routs the forces
that opposed him. Advice of this is immediately sent to
Sylloeus, then in Italy : he procures an audience of Augus
tus ; tells him, that Herod had made an incursion into Ara
bia, laid waste the country, and killed five and twenty
hundred Arabians with their general. Augustus, having
heard this, inquires of Herod's friends at Rome, and of
persons who arrived from Syria, whether this was matter of
fact. Being assured it was, without ever asking the occa
sion, * he writes a letter to Herod in very angry terms.s

* The substance of this letter was, that whereas he had
' hitherto treated him as a friend, he should for the future

* treat him as a subject.9

Herod then sent ambassadors to Rome; but they were
forced to return, without so much as obtaining* an audience.

f Joseph. Ant. lib. xvi. cap. 9. p. 734. « Opy?? rf /uei£wv

£ -yivtro Tif) Kaiaapi, KO.I ypa$« TTQOQ TOV 'Hpwfojv, rare aXXa %aX£7ru>f, KCLI T&TO
TIJQ 67rt<roX*7£ TO KttyaXaiov, ort-TraXai ^jOWjusvof aury 0iXy vvv
Id. ibid. p. 735.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 291

A second embassy likewise went to Rome without any ef
fect.11

In the mean time Obodas dies, and Aretas takes upon
him the crown of Arabia, and then sends away ambassadors
to Rome, with large presents ; withal accusing* Syllaeus, his
predecessor's chief minister, of many great crimes. But
Syllseus was still in great favour at Rome, and Augustus
was offended, that Aretas had taken upon him the govern
ment of Arabia without first obtaining his leave ; and sent
back the ambassadors without receiving the presents, or
admitting them to an audience. * The affairs of these two

* kingdoms of Judea and Arabia were then in a very bad

* posture. In one there was a king not confirmed in his

* government; and Herod having lost the emperor's favour,
' was forced to submit to many disgraces and affronts.

* Seeing no end of these evils, he resolved to send once

* more an embassy to Rome, and to try whether he could

* gain friends there, and by them recover the emperor's
' good-will. The person sent upon this occasion was Nico-
' las of Damascus.' *

This Nicolas, who was ever firm to Herod's interest, was
a man of great abilities, and of admirable address. When
he came to Rome, Sylleeus's power was declining : new in
formations against him had been brought from Arabia, and
Nicolas artfully joining in with the Arabians, procures an
audience of Augustus ; and having first supported the
charges brought by them against Syllaeus, he proceeded to
the defence of Herod. * Here the emperor stopped him
' short, and bid him answer, whether Herod had not march-

* ed his forces into Arabia, and slain five and twenty hundred

* men?' To which Nicolas replied, that the things the emperor
had heard concerning Herod, were in part true and in part
false, and that the occasion of all had been concealed from him.
Ho informed the emperor of the differences between Obodas
and Herod ; that certain stipulations had been entered into,
in the presence of Saturninus and Volumnius: that Syllseus
had sworn by the emperor's fortune, that the terms agreed
upon should be punctually executed, but that nothing had
been done : that Herod had not moved his forces, till he
had first obtained the consent of the emperor's chief officers

P. 736. init. ' Ta de Trept TJJV ladaiav KO.I

Apaf3iav, aei KO.I paXXov eTTtdtda, — TIOV -yap flamXtaiv, o fitv STTOJ TTJV apxw
f3t(Saiav {%a)v' — 'H|Otod»/£ He, tfi big t]p,vvtTO r«%tov, opyiaOtVTOQ avrtp Katrra-
po£, oiraffac; ra£ tig avrov Trapavofiiag ^epttv rjvayKa&TO' TTtpag d' aStv opaii/
TUV Trepu^wrwv Ka/cwv, tyvu TraXiv £t£ 'Pwprjv a7To<r£\X«v, ft TI dvvaiTO jtifrpiw-
Ttpov evptiv fiia re rwv 0i\wi/, KO.I ?rpO£ avrov Kaicrapa rtjv tVTV%iav 7roir)Gop,t voct
K. T. X. p. 736.

u2

292 Credibility of the Gospel History.

in Syria, and that the numbers of the slain had been very
much magnified. Augustus, perceiving that his displeasure
against Herod had been built upon misrepresentations, was
appeased ; and at length pronounced a sentence, that
Sylloeus should return home, give Herod satisfaction, and
then be punished for his crimes.k

Some time after this we have an account of some dis
turbances in Herod's family. A very strict friendship had
commenced between Antipater, Herod's eldest son, Pheroras,
Herod's brother, and Pheroras's wife, who was particularly
disagreeable to Herod. Salome, Herod's sister, who knew
almost every thing, suspected that these three were carry
ing on designs against her brother. She came and told him
what she knew ; and Herod had had some intelligence be
fore, and was full of suspicions, but what he had heard was
not fully confirmed. There follows immediately upon this,
a passage of so extraordinary a nature, that it must be
transcribed without any abridgment. * There was moreover,'
says ! Joseph us, ' a certain sect of Jews, who valued thern-

* selves highly for their exact knowledge of the law ; and
' talking much of their interest with God, were greatly in

* favour with the women. They are called pharisees, men
6 who had it in their power to control kings ; extremely
' subtle, and ready to attempt any thing against those whom
' they did not like. When therefore the whole Jewish
' nation took an oath to be faithful to Caesar, and the in-

* terests of the king, these men, to the number of above six

* thousand, refused to swear. The king having laid a fine

* upon them, Pheroras's wife paid the money for them.

* They, in requital for this her kindness, (for they were sup-

k Id. ibid. cap. 10. p. 740, 741. ' Kat r]v yap HOQIOV n

Isda'iKuv av$pw7rwv CTT' aKpifiwati psya $pov8j> TS Trarpis VOJJLS, oig %aiotiv TO
•9-eiov TTpoffTTOisfitviov virrjKTO r] yvvaiKuviTiQ' $api«ra»oi jcaXavrat fiaai\tvai
<Wa/j£i/ot juaXt<ra avrnrpafffftiv, Trpojujjfeie, KO.K TS TTQSITTS tig TO iroXffJifiv TE
Kai (3\cnrTtiv tirtipptvoi' TTCLVTOQ ysv TS Isda'iKs j8«/3atw(Tavrog Si OQKUJV rj /j,ijv
evvorfaai Katffapt, /cat TOIQ jSaffiXfWf 7rpay/ia<ri, 01 St ol avdpeg «K w/zo<rai/,
virep e£aKi(T)£iXioi* /cat O.VT&Q f3aai\e<j}Q ^r]fjii(s}ffavTog xpijpaffiv,
Trjv %r)[juav VTrep avTwv eifffaoti' ol Si a/Jii:i(3op,evoi rr\v ivvoiav airj/f,

Se tTTtTTl^tVOVTO £7Tt00tr^«T6t T8 068, TTpsXfyOV (t)Q 'Hpw^ fJ,£

a9XnQ V7ro ©£« f^rj^ifffievrjg aury re /cat ytvtt r^> an-' avTa, TIJQ
TI eKfivrjv TTtpir]Zii(TT]£ KM 3>£pwpav, TTdiddQ Tt ol tttv ctvTOtQ. Kat ra^£, a yap
cXavOavt TI\V SaXw^Tjv, E^ayyeXra (3aai\ti rjv, Kai OTI rwv 7T£pt rr\v av\t\v Sta(j)-
Ottooiev rivac,' KCU o f3a<ri\£vg TWV re 4>api<raiwv TSQ airtwrars^ avaipei, Kat
Baywav rov tvvaxov> Kapov r£ rtva TOJV TOTS. iroK^ovTa aptry T«
Kai TraiSiKa ovra avrs' KTILVU Se feat Trav 6, TI TS oineis avvti^rjKti olg 6
e\syev' Hpro Se o Baywac VTT avTiov, a>£ TraTtjp TC Kai evepytTrjg
ffonsvoQ, TS f7TiKaTa^a9r]crofjitvs Trpwpprjcret (3a<Ji\i(O£, Kara %£ipa yap
•jravra £tvat, Trapt^ovTOQ avTty yaps T£ ter^w, feat 7rat^w(T£a»£ TtKviov
Aritiq. lib. xvii. cap. 2. sect. 6.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 293

* posed, by their great intimacy with God, to have attained
' to the gift of foreknowledge ;) foretold that God having
( decreed to put an end to the government of Herod and
' his race, the kingdom would be transferred to her and
' Pheroras and their children. Salome, who was ignorant of
' none of these things, came and told the king of them, and

* assured him likewise, that many of the court were cor-

* rupted by them. Then the king put to death the most

* guilty of the pharisees, and Bagoas the eunuch, and one
' Cams, the most beautiful young man about the court, and

* the great instrument in the king's unlawful pleasures. He

* likewise slew every one in his own family, who adhered
' to those things which were said by the pharisees. But

* Bagoas had been elevated by them, in that he should be

* called father and benefactor, the king, who was to be

* appointed according to their prediction, (for all things
' would be in his power,) being to give him a capacity of

* marriage, and of having children of his own.'

In the margin™ I justify my version of this passage, as
to one particular, in which it is singular. But beside that,
possibly some may have a scruple about this sentence, * He
' likewise slew every one of his own family, who adhered to
6 those things which were said by the pharisees.' The ori
ginal word is in the singular number, * which were said by
' the pharisee,' or ' which the pharisee said.' If any should
be apt to think from hence, that this has reference to some-

m This passage of Josephus has been already quoted very often by learned
men, who have treated of this census, or of the true time of our Saviour's
nativity. But all, whom I have seen, have followed Gelenius's version of
these last words, which is thus. Nam Bagoas in earn spem sublatus erat, quasi
parens et benefactor appelland us regis, quern destinarent vaticinia; prospers
enim cessura novo regi omnia, constabiliendo successionem prolis legitimoe,
I suppose they did not look upon the original j if they had, they would have
easily perceived his mistake. Nor does the argument, that this affair has a re
lation to our census, stand thus in its full force, as will appear by and by.
Hudson has very much corrected Gelenius's version, and translates the con
cluding words thus : Fuit autem per eos elatus Bagoas, quod dicerent eum
patrem beneficumque appellatum iri ejus, qui ex eorum preedictione creandus
rex esset ; habiturum enim eurn regem omnium rerum potestatem, et Bagoae
vires conciliaturum cum muliere congrediendi, propriosque liberos gignendi.
But, methinks, the sense of this is not very extraordinary. Bagoas is to receive
a great benefit from the king, and bestows none upon him, that I see; and yet
he is to be called his father and benefactor. I think that Josephus says, that
the pharisees gave out, that Bagoas was to become, or to be called, a father :
and thereby, that is, by his having children, would also be a benefactor to his
country. I have made no alteration in the original words of Josephus. I have
only inserted a comma after ovofiaa9t)<TOfj.evogt and changed the colon after
paffiXtwQ to a comma. This interpretation is not my own ; I had it from my
learned and ingenious ftiend, Mr. Ward, to whom I am very much indebted
for this, and divers other critical observations, which I highly value.

294 Credibility of the Gospel History.

thing said by some particular pharisee, I must desire tlienl
to consider the context. It is evident, from what goes be
fore and follows that period, that the pharisees in general
were concerned in this affair, though some only were
punished ; the most guilty, as Josephus calls them. The
same phrase is in another place used by Josephus, where
the pharisees in general are intended. Thus he says,
' The sadducees, when in office, usually go into the mea-
* sures" of the pharisees:' in the original it is, ' of the pha-
' risee.'

I take this oath, which Josephus here speaks of, to be
the same thing with St. Luke's taxing, for these reasons :

(1.) As far as I can perceive, this oath must have been
taken much about the same time with the taxing or census
mentioned by St. Luke, according to all those who place
the nativity of Jesus some time between twelve or fifteen
months, and two years, before the death of Herod.

(2.) There is a great variety of circumstances attending
this oath of Josephus, that accord with the history the
evangelists have given us of the birth of Jesus. I imagine
I am very much prevented by the reader, but I shall speci
fy some of them.

St. Luke says, " There went out a decree from Casar
Augustus, that all the land should be taxed." The sub
stance of the oath in Josephus was, to * be faithful to Ccesarj
as well as to Herod. An oath is a formal acknowledgment
of subjection, as well as an engagement to fidelity : no
greater acknowledgment of subjection could be made than
an enrolment in a Roman census. St. Luke says the decree
wras, that all the land should be taxed, and that all went to
be taxed. Josephus agrees with him surprisingly, when he
says, that * All the Jewish nation' took the oath, except six
thousand pharisees.

St. Luke's taxing, and Josephus's oath, are followed
with parallel events. When the wise men came saying,
" Where is he that is born king of the Jews ? Herod
was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him." Josephus's
account is a perfect comment upon St. Matthew. St.
Matthew says, ch. ii. 4, 5, " When he [Herod] had
gathered the chief priests and scribes of the people toge
ther, he demanded of them, where Christ should be born.
And they said unto him, In Bethlehem of Judea : for thus
it is written by the prophet ; And thou Bethlehem — art not
the least among the princes of Juda : for out of thee shall

OTTOTC yap CTT' ap^af TraptXOoifv,— - 7rpo<7^a>p8(7i 5' sv oif 6 <S>api<ratO£ Xcyt*.
Ant. lib. xviii. cap. 1. sect. 4.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2, considered. 295

come a governor that shall rule my people Israel. So that
all the disturbance at Jerusalem, which St. Matthew speaks
of, was on account of the birth of a king of the Jews. It
is the same thing1 in Josephus. And the chief priests and
scribes in St. Matthew were undoubtedly of the pharisees,
which are the persons so much spoken of by Josephus.
The king in Josephus has a character of the Christ or
Messias : for all things would be in his power. Whether
the jest upon Bagoas, and through him upon the pharisees,
be of Josephus's own invention ; or whether it was an old
piece of wit in use among profane people, to banter those
who expected great things from the Messias; or whether
it be matter of fact, that some of the pharisees did at that
time give any such assurances to some person of influence
in Judea, the better to carry on selfish designs, I do not
determine. But it is an evidence that the king who was
then the subject of discourse, was supposed to be an ex
traordinary person.

In Josephus the pharisees give out a prediction, that « God
* had decreed to put an end to Herod's government,' &c.
This I take to be the same thing with " the chief priests
and scribes:0 Thus it is written by the prophet," in St.
Matthew : that is, what Josephus calls a prediction or pro
phecy of the pharisees, is no more than an interpretation or
application of an ancient prophecy. Thus Josephus took
upon himself the air and character of a prophet, when he
applied the ancient Jewish prophecies of the Messias to
Vespasian. He was taken prisoner by Vespasian, then
general in Judea under Nero. Josephus, hearing that Ves
pasian had a design to send him to the emperor, desired that
he might speak with the general in private. Being* brought
before Vespasian, and all the company being dismissed, ex
cept Titus and two friends, Josephus begins : ' You think,
Vespasian, that you have in Josephus a mere prisoner :
but I am come to you as a messenger of great things.
Had I not been sent to you by God, I knew what the law
of the Jews is, and how it becomes a general to die. Do
you send me to Nero ? What ! are they who are to suc
ceed Nero before you to continue ? You, Vespasian, will

0 Unde putas factum, ut eo ipso tempore, proxime post descriptionem Juda'i-
cam Pharisaei vaticinia ista tractarent, et pro lubitu suo inlerpretarentur ? Num-
quid res ipsa testimonium perhibet Matthaei narration! ? Nonne audis magos
ab oriente quacrentes, ubi natus sit Rex Judaeorum ? Nonne Herodem scisci-
tantem a Pharisaeis, ubi Christus nasceretur ? His enim occasionibus, his
Herodis mandatis, Pharisaei ad prophetarum libros remissi, vaticinia de quibus
quaerebatur prolata, ad placitum uxoris Pherorae, secretis colloquiisdetorserunt.
Kepler, de Anno Natal. Christ, cap. 12.

296 Credibility of the Gospel History.

be Csesar : yon, and this your son will be emperor. Bind
me therefore still faster, and reserve me for yourself; for
you shall be lord not of me only, but of the earth, and the
sea, and of all mankind : and for punishment I deserve a
closer confinement, if I now speak falsehood to you in the
name of God.'P

However, beside the answer given by the scribes to
Herod's inquiry, we are to remember the speech made by
old Simeon, an eminent pharisee, at the presentation of Jesus
at the temple ; and that Anna a prophetess gave thanks
unto the Lord, and spake of him to all them that looked
for redemption in Israel. And there might be many other
such like things said there by others ; to all which Josephus,
a priest, and well informed of what was said and done at
the temple, may be justly supposed to have a reference.

St. Matthew says, that " when Herod saw that he was
mocked of the wise men, he was exceeding wroth, and sent
forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and
in all the coasts thereof." Josephus has given us the tokens
of an uncommon rage in Herod : and though St. Matthew
has related, upon this occasion, no other instance of Herod's
cruelty, beside the orders for destroying the children in and
near Bethlehem; yet nothing is more likely, than that
Herod, the most jealous of mortals, should, upon the re
treat of the wise men, be filled with suspicions that the
scribes and pharisees, whom he had lately consulted about
the birth-place of the king of the Jews, had been accessary
to the disappointment he had met with from the said wise
men : and that being heated by the insinuations of his sister
Salome, (provided Josephus has not brought her in here for
the sake of a jest;) and by the barbarous counsels of his
son Antipater, now in Judea, and in high favour, he should
then make also that cruel ravage in his court and at Jeru
salem, of which our Jewish historian has given us a summary
account.

3. As I think that Josephus was a very firm Jew, so his
indecent way of speaking of this affair is a strong proof, it
relates to the transactions at Jerusalem after the birth of
Jesus. Is it not strange, that Josephus should banter the
pharisees for pretending to the gift of foreknowledge, when
he himself, a pharisee, has been most notoriously guilty of
it? I intend not only his speech to Vespasian just now
transcribed : there are other, rather more flagrant instances,

p Eyw fc ITTI Ttjitwptav deofiai 0p8pac /U£i£oyof, « TL KartfJ^tha^o) Kai Ot».
Joseph, de Bell. lib. iii. cap. 7. sect. 9.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 297

and that in the history of the^ Jewish war, written long-
before his Antiquities, in which is the passage we are upon.
His ridicule of the pharisees appears to me very unseason
able in an account of such a scene of cruelty, and when
they were under very heavy sufferings : and for what? For
refusing the oath of fidelity? No. They had escaped with
a fine for not swearing to Ceesar, if there had not followed
some offences more particularly against Herod, as is pre
tended. And what are these? Why predictions and ex
pectations, that the kingdom was by the decree and
appointment of God to be transferred to some person not of
Herod's race : another instance of agreement with the time
that succeeded the birth of Jesus, which, according to the
evangelists, was a time of great expectation of a king pre
dicted and prophesied of. But here is not one riotous or
seditious action mentioned or hinted ; the utmost is seditious
words: and yet Josephus justifies, triumphs in these terri
ble executions. In a word, he, who uses to condemn Herod
as a man of an inhuman disposition, here treats the pharisees
of this time with Herodian cruelty.

All this is absolutely unaccountable to me, but upon the
supposition that this affair relates to the birth of Jesus : nor
do 1 think that I wrong Josephus in the least. It is to me
more than probable, that every Jew who did not believe
Jesus to be the Christ, (as Josephus did not,) had a great
deal of ill-will against him and all his followers. That any
Jew of those times should have been long in a state of in
difference upon this point, was impossible.

If it be said, that the predictions mentioned by Josephus
relate not to Jesus, but to Pheroras's wife, and her children ;
I do not deny, but that she might pay a regard to what the
pharisees said at this time, as well as others did : but that
she, or Pheroras, or any one issuing from them, was the
person then discoursed of, and the chief subject of the pha
risees' predictions, I do not believe, because it is inconsistent
with the rest of Joseph us's story. If Pheroras's wife had
been the person chiefly concerned in this affair, as Josephus
pretends here ; would she have escaped with her life in so
wide a scene of cruelty, in which even the former favourites
of Herod were involved ? If the dispositions of people ran
now all toward Pheroras and his wife, would Antipater
have been still great with them? Would Antipater, so de
sirous of the crown, have gone away to Rome, as he did
soon after this execution, and leave things in this posture ?

i Vid. de Bell. lib. iii. cap. 7. sect. 3. vid. etiam quse sequuntur Joseph! ad
Vespasianum alloquium. Ibid. sect. 9.

298 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Would he, when he went away, leave securely in the hands
of Pheroras and his wife the work of poisoning his father,
and securing* the succession for himself? Would not Anti-
pater, who had lately with exquisite artifice and cruelty
accomplished the death of his two brothers, sons of Herod
by Mariamne, have been able to effect the ruin of Pheroras's
wife ?

It is true, after this execution was over, she was called to
account by Herod.

That it may not be insinuated that J conceal any difficulty,
I will here give the reader Josephus's words, which follow
next after the long passage we are concerned with. ' Herod
' having punished the pharisees, who had been convicted
' of concerning themselves in this affair, calls a council of
' his friends, and there accuses Pheroras's wife : ascribing
4 to her the affront that had been offered to the virgins/ and
' therein to him : adding, that she did all she could to ere-

* ate a difference between him and his brother ; that the
' fine imposed upon the pharisees had been evaded by her

* means, and that in the present affair nothing had been
' done without her : — and that if Pheroras had any regard
4 for him, he would of his own accord put away bis wife.
' You will then, says he to Pheroras, be my brother indeed,
' and we shall live8 together in friendship.'

If the meaning of the last words of the charge against
this woman be not, that in the * present affair nothing had

* been done without her,' as I have rendered them, but that

* now-a-days nothing was done without her,' as Dr. Hudson
translates them ;* then her conduct in the late affair is not
so much as made any particular crime, but is only compre
hended in a general charge of an over busy, intriguing tem
per.

r The virgins.] The meaning is, Pheroras's wife had been his servant.
Herod had offered Pheroras one of his daughters, and after that another. But
Pheroras refused them both out of his affection for this woman.

* 'HjOto$»7f Se, Ko\aaag TMV Qapiffaiwv r«£ ETTI roiads £\r]\eyp.tv&
re Trotfirai rwv <j)i\wv, Kai Kanj-yoptav TTJQ ^Epwps yvvaiKOQ, rqv rt v(3piv
7rap9ei'(t)V ry roXjuy rr]Q ywai/co£ avartOftf, KM £y/cX?7jua TO.VTTJV arifjuav
TrcisfjievoG, a><r£ aydivoOtreiv <^a<nv avr<i> Trpof TOV afitXtyov icai TroXf/iov t/c (j>v~
<T£a>£ avroig Kai Xoy^j /cat Si epywv oaa dvvairo, TJJV re diaXvcriv rrjg Zr)/j.ia(, rriQ
VTT avrs tTn^XijOtiffTjg rtXeai diatyfvxQqvai TOIQ tKtivr]£, TWV TC vvv TrtTrpay-
v 6, TI «' JUET' avrijg' avQ' <l)v $fpwpa /caXwf EX*IV> s &*?<«*'«& yvw-
£i(ijjyrj(Tewe TOJV r/juwv, avTOKtXtv^ov a7T07rt/i7r£(T0ai yvvaiica Tavrrjv, wf
Trpof jU£ ooi dinar tffop,evr]v' Kai vvv, ctTTfp avmroiy cvyytvfiac; rr]Q
a7T£i7racr0oft rrjvde TJJV yafitTijv' p,fvttQ yap OVTOJQ E^OQ a^tX^o^ re /cat
v SK a7r^XXay/t£j/oc. Antiq. lib. xvii. cap. 3. sect. 1.
1 Suisque impendiis evitata esset solutio mulctae ab ipso impositce, nihilque
jam sine ilia ageretur.

Objcctio^is" against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 299

But let it be granted that Josephus says, her conduct in
this affair was an express charge in Herod's accusation ;
yet the punishment proposed confutes the supposition, that
she was the main agent in this concern. Herod assures
Pheroras, they two should be very good friends if this wo
man were but * put away.' Would this disgrace have
satisfied Herod, if, 'beside many other provocations, she had
now been the principal in a crime for which many accessa
ries, and those in all other respects very acceptable persons,
had been punished with death ? I hope we may be allowed
not to credit Josephus in a circumstance so inconsistent with
the rest of his account ; and I think, it is not hard to guess
why Josephus gave some false turns in this story.

I have one thing more to desire of the reader, that is,
that he will be pleased to consider, whether Josephus does
not contradict himself in the main passage in which he is so
merry. He tells us at first, that the pharisees in requital
for the kindness showed to them, foretold that God had
decreed to transfer, the kingdom to * Pheroras's wife, and
' Pheroras, and their children ;' but at the end, it is ' the
' king who was to be appointed according to their predic-
' tion.' How cornes ' Pheroras's wife, and Pheroras, and
* their children,' to be all a king? Or how came the king
to be all them ? If the reader can reconcile these things
together, it will be very well ; but if he cannot, perhaps he
will allow, that here are some things said of Pheroras's wife
and the pharisees without foundation. I ever take it, that
inconsistences are a certain sign, that an historian has not
confined himself barely to matter of fact, but has indulged
his fancy or his passions, and gone into fiction.

For these reasons then I think, that the oath in Josephus,
taken by all the Jewish nation, is the same thing with the
taxing or enrolment mentioned by St. Luke : and T think,
that this oath refers to a census made in Judea, for the fol
lowing reasons. In a census the people gave in account
of themselves and their estates upon oath. It seems to me
very probable that a census was made, or at least ordered
by Augustus, during the time that Herod lay under his
displeasure. Under the former particular I show, that He
rod had been before this a tributary prince. His great
subjection appears likewise in the difference between him
and Obodas ; he was obliged to refer the matter in dispute
to the emperor's officers in Syria: after Obodas had broke
the stipulations, Herod did not dare to move his forces with
out the consent of the fore-mentioned officers; and Augustus,

300 Credibility of the Gospel tiistofy.

supposing that lie had done so, was very angry, and
threatens, that whereas he had ' hitherto used him as &
6 friend, he should for the future treat him as a subject.'
These words are undoubtedly proper and expressive words ;
if Herod, when a friend of Augustus, was in such subjec
tion, what can a subject mean, but the reducing him to the
lowest state of dependent princes ? Which seems to be that
of obliging them to submit to a census, and then raising
tribute in their dominions according to it.

Josephus says, that after the receipt of this letter from
Augustus, Herod sent in vain two embassies to Rome, that
the state of Judea grew worse and worse, that Herod was
obliged to submit to many disgraces. The emperor's dis
pleasure against Herod was manifest therefore, not at Rome
only, but in all the countries about Judea.

(1.) But it may be objected, that Josephus has no where
said, that there was any enrolment of the Jews, much less
that there was a proper census made in Judea.

To this I answer, that it is apparent there was an enrol
ment and numbering of the people. How else should all
the people have taken an oath, except six thousand phari-
sees ? Did they not enter the people that took the oath ? If
they did not, how should it have been known who swore
and who did not ?

Nor can it be inferred there was no enrolment or census,
because Josephus has not expressly said there was. Jose-
phus's account of this matter is very slight and defective:
if it had not been for some things which followed after the
oath, and had some connection with it, it seems that he
would have taken no notice of it at all. An oath had been
taken by all the Jewish nation to Csesar and Herod, and
great exactness had been observed in relation to it ; the
numbers and characters of those which had refused were
known. This was an affair of importance, and deserved a
much more particular account than he has given us : and
we are allowed to suppose some things not expressed, which
must necessarily have been concomitants of it.

I do not pretend to assign positively the reasons of his
slight mention of this affair, but I apprehend I can give
some probable account of it. Herod's subjects were all
enrolled in a census, but there was no tribute demanded
upon it : Herod had great dexterity, or very good fortune,
in surmounting the difficulties he met with in the several
parts of his life ; he was himself a man of a great genius,
and some of his servants were men of great abilities.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 301

Nicolas of Damascus in particular was eminent for learning"
and address ; and Herod knew very well how to bestow a
present or a bribe.

I am moreover inclined to think, that no tax was raised
upon this census, because it appears that after those trou
bles, of which Josephus has given us an account, Augustus
was in a great measure reconciled to Herod. Perceiving1
that his resentment against Herod had been very much
founded upon aspersions, he might be disposed to forbear
exacting the tribute upon the census, and to let things go
on in the old way. Then Herod had taken care that the
decree should be obeyed and executed in his dominions
without disturbance : all had sworn or enrolled themselves
except six thousand pharisees, and they were fined.

Moreover, Herod was now an old man, and had many
sons; it was therefore very likely, there would be some
partition made of his dominions at his death, and Augustus
might be very willing there should be so. Three or four
little princes are better governed than one that is powerful.
Tribute could not be paid according to this census, any
longer than the several parts of the kingdom continued
united in one person ; when it came to be divided or par
celled out, a new census would be necessary.

If then no tribute was paid upon this census, an historian
could the more easily pass it by without a particular de
scription, especially since it had been finished without any
popular tumults.

It may be inferred from the manner in which St. Luke
mentions this survey, that it was not very much taken notice
of: if it had been universally known, there had been hardly
any occasion, upon the mention of a decree of Augustus in
the reign of Herod to enrol all the land, to subjoin a paren
thesis, the chief intent of which seems to be, to distinguish
this from another that happened not till after the removal of
Herod's successor.

If this census was not universally known when Josephus
wrote, he might be well pleased to touch upon it slightly.
The Jewish writers were very forward to enumerate the
honours done to their people by the Roman senate, or the
chief men of the commonwealth, or the emperors afterwards ;
the better to gain some regard among other nations, by
whom they were generally despised and hated : but as for
any disgraces they received from the Romans, the case was
very different.

Thus Josephus has mentioned many favours conferred on
the Jews by Julius Ceesar, Augustus, Li via, Marcus Agrippa,

302 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Claudius, and other Romans ; but yet he says nothing of
the journey which Caius, Augustus's eldest adopted son,
made through Judea, in the beginning of the reign of Ar-
chelaus. This we have from" Suetonius only, an author
very little concerned in Jewish affairs. The reason seems
to be, that Caius offered no sacrifice at Jerusalem, nor made
any present to the temple, which was deemed a piece of
contempt shown to their religion.

Possibly, Josephus found but a slender account of this
transaction in the history of Nicolas of Damascus, from
which he took his materials for this reign. Though Nicolas
was no Jew, yet he was a great friend and flatterer of He
rod ; and it could not but be an ungrateful task to him, after
he had in the former part of his work drawn his master as
a great genius, a founder of cities, arid friend of Augustus,
to describe at last so disagreeable a scene, as that of one of
the emperor's officers enrolling all the subjects of his do
minions.

Nicolas v had great intimacies with Herod : Josephus has
affirmed more than once, that he was a great flatterer of
whim. And in one place says particularly, * that living in
* his kingdom, and together with him, he composed his
' history, with a view to please the king and advance his in-
' terest, touching upon those things only which made for
' x his honour.' This enrolment, even though it was not a
proper assessment, but only an entry of the names of all the
people, their age and condition, accompanied with an oath
of strict fidelity to the emperor, must have been the greatest
mortification of Herod's whole life: and from the character
of Nicolas, just set down, it may be concluded almost with
certainty, that he did not give a particular account of this
affair : nor had Josephus any inducements to supply his
defects in this place.

(2.) But it will be said, that the silence of Josephus is
not the only difficulty : there is in him well nigh positive
proof, that there had been no census or enrolment made in
Judea before the removal of Archelaus; for upon the occa
sion of this he says, * Moreover Cyrenius came into Judea,
' it being annexed to the province of Syria, to make an

u Sed et Caium Nepotem, quod Judaeam praetervehens apud Hierosolymam
non supplicasset, collaudavit [Augustus*] Suet, in Aug. c. 93.

v Kai NiKoXaoc; 6 Aa/iacncTjvof, 0i\o£ re wv TS /SafftXewg, jcai ra iravra GVV-
diairw/zei'oe tKtivy, K. X. Antiq. lib. xvii. cap. 5. sect. 3.

w Ibid. lib. xiv. cap. 1. sect. 3.

x ZWVTI yap iv rg (3aai\Eiq, icai (rvv airy /cf^ajOKTjMCvwg eictivy KOI icaO' virtj-
ptaiav aveypcupev, povov ctTTTOfjiivoc; TUV TTpog tVK\nav avry Qipovruv. Ant.
lib. xvi. cap. 7. sect. 1.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 303

.* assessment of their goods, and seize Archelaus's estate.

* The Jews were at first very much moved at the? mention
'< of the enrolments, but by degrees they were brought to

* acquiesce at the persuasion of Joazar the high priest.'
He observes also, * that at this time Judas the Gaulonite

* excited them to a rebellion, telling them that a census

* would introduce downright2 slavery.' It will be said: It
may be hence inferred, that there had been no enrolments
made before; if there had, they could not have been so
frightful now.

I answer, that there must have been an enrolment made,
when the oath mentioned by Josephus was taken : and that
oath was likewise an express and solemn acknowledgment
of subjection to the Romans.

Besides, though this oath had been quite omitted by Jo
sephus, it would not have followed, that there had been no
enrolment made before this time in Judea. People are not
always of the same temper. Judas of Galilee now broached
or revived the principle that they ought to obey none but
God ; and for some reasons it was received with great ap
plause, spread, and gained ground. But the Jews must
have been more submissive when they all took the oath to
Caesar, except six thousand. And after Herod was dead,
there was a numerous embassy sent to Rome in the name of
the whole Jewish nation, entreating, that instead of being
governed by any of Herod's descendants, « theya might be

* annexed to the province of Syria, and be subject to proetors

* sent from thence, promising likewise a most quiet and

* peaceable behaviour under such a government.'

In another place, Josephus represents Judas's arguments
in these terms : ' And at this time a certain man, called Judas
' the Galilean, excited the people to rebellion, telling them,
' they had a mean spirit, if they could endure to pay tribute
' to the Romans, and acknowledge mortal men for their
' lords ; - after God had been their king.'b It might be
as well inferred from what Judas says here, that the Jews
had never before paid tribute to the Romans, or been sub
ject to mortal lords ; as from what he says in the other
place, that they had never before been enrolled. I presume

y Ot de, KaiTTtp TO *rar' crp^af tv Seivq) ipfpovrtQ rrjv tiri TCCIQ
aKpoaaiv Antiq. 1, xviii. c. 1. sect. 1.

Ibid. a Hi/ Se KtfjxiXaiov CIVTOIQ TT

(3aai\tictQ fjitv KO.I TOitovSe ap%wj/ aTTTjXXax&ii, TrpoaOtjKrjv fo 'Svpias -/eyovorag
vTTOTaaaeaQai TOIQ enure TrejuTro/uvoig <zparqyoiG' K. r. X. Jos. Ant. 1. xvii. p.
784. v. 35. b Kaici£wv, ft 0opoi/ re 'Pw^tatotg

rtXeiv v7ro/ifi/8(Ti, »cai juera TOV Qeov oiasai Srvijrss fc<T7rora£. De Bell. 1. ii.
cap. 8. secf. 1.

304 Credibility of the Gospel History.

it need not be proved, that they had been subject, before
this, to mortal lords. I think too, that I have shown, they
had been tributary to the Romans in the reign of Herod.
They had likewise paid tribute to the Romans before Herod's
reign : for Josephus says, that ' Cassius imposed a heavy
' tribute upon the people [in Syria] ; and in particular bore
' very hard upon Judea, exacting of them seven hundred
* talents of silver.'0 This sum was laid in several portions
upon the several parts of Judea ; and Herod, then governor
of Galilee under Hyrcanus, brought in his quota the first,
and thereby very much obliged Cassius. Judas's speech
therefore is no proof, that there had been no enrolment or
census made in Judea before the removal of Archelaus.

(3.) I can think of but one difficulty more. Perhaps
some will say, my argument is defective, and that in order
to make it out, that this oath taken by the Jews, in Jose
phus, was a census, I ought to produce some passages of
an ancient writer, in which a census is called an oath, or
the act of the people enrolling themselves in a census, is
expressed by taking an oath. I own then, that I have not
any such example by me. However, I would offer here
two or three considerations.

[1.] In a Roman census the people gave in their account
of themselves and their estates upon oath : and that oath,
as represented by Dionysius, has a very near resemblance
with the words of Josephus. Dionysius says, the people
were commanded to ' take an oath to give in a true account,
' according to the best of their knowledge :' and Josephus
says, ' that the whole Jewish nation engaged by and oath to
' be faithful to Caesar and the interests of the king.'

[2.] We have in the ancient writers very few accounts of
assessments made in provinces. The Roman historians
scarce ever take any notice of them, but when they were
attended with some disturbances which make them remark
able. As we have but very few writers of those times, es
pecially such as lived in the provinces, it is not to be
wondered that we meet with some singular phrases in those
we have, and which we cannot parallel in any other authors
now in our hands. If we had before us the works of a good

c Kai 0op8£ avTaiQ /ugyaXsc fTrercOa* /ia\t?a Be rrjv ladaiav eicaKwtrfv, f
cria raXavTo. apyvpis «<77rparro/i£voe. Ant. lib. xiv. cap. xi. sect. 2.
d There is another thing which may deserve notice. Dionysius says, That
the penalty at Rome for not enrolling in a census was loss of estate and
citizenship. Perhaps the fine imposed on the pharisees, who refused to swear,
was now ordered in conformity to the Roman customs upon like occasions.
For Herod had been wont before to inflict punishments of another kind for
refusing to swear fidelity to him. Vid. Antiq. 1. xv. c. 10. sect. 4.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 305

number of provincial writers, it is not unlikely, but we
might see some of them represent their nation enrolling
themselves in a census, especially in the first census made
in their country, by the taking an oath of allegiance and
fidelity to the emperor. I shall give an instance from Jo-
sephus, which has likewise some affinity with our subject.
In the Jewish War he calls Fabatus Caesar's procurator:6
in his Antiquitiesf he calls him Caesar's servant. He also
calls one Stephen, who was in Judea in the time of Cuma-
nus, Caesar's servant. ' And& at this time,' says he, * some
* who aimed at innovations, set upon Stephen, a servant of
' Caesar, in the high-way, about a hundred stadia from the
' city, and robbed him of all he had.' I have shown above,
that Fabatus was Augustus's procurator in the kingdom of
Arabia, if not also in Judea. And that Stephen also was
procurator in Judea may be concluded from the treasure he
had with him, and from his being particularly the object of
the spite of the seditious Jews, who were uneasy under the
Roman government. So that with Josephus, the emperor's
servant, and the procurator of the emperor's revenue, were
synonymous terms. If Josephus appears at present singular
in this style, yet I doubt not, but it was at that time very
common.

[3.] I apprehend that though the Jews entered themselves
and their estates in the way of a Roman census, yet there
was no tribute raised upon it : which might be the reason
of Josephus's representing this affair simply by taking an
oath, rather than by the name of a census.

I have now laid before the reader the evidence I have for
this supposition, that there was a census made in Judea a
little before the death of Herod. The particulars mentioned
by St. Luke, and the expressions he uses, are very suitable
to a census. And the posture of Herod's affairs about this
time, inclines me to think there was an enrolment, after the
manner of a Roman census, made in his dominions by order
of Augustus.

But whether I am in the right or not, St. Luke certainly
says, that there was an enrolment; and Josephus says, that
the whole Jewish nation had taken an oath to be faithful to

e Iltioag Se TroXXotg xpjj/tatri <J>a/3arov, TOV Kat<rapo£ dioiKTjTtjv. De Bell. 1.
i. cap. 29. p. 1030. v. 22. vid. et v. 29.

f A.vgpi}Kiva.i Se Kai 3>a/3aroi>, Katffapog ds\ov' Ant. 1. xvii. cap. 3. p.

755. v. 6. s TWV yap f^£<ru)rajv eiri

TivtQ, Kara rr\v Srjuoaiav odov fc>£ fKarov <ra£iwj/ cnrwQtv TTJQ TroXewf,
Kai<rapo£ 5s\ov odonropnvTa Xy?tv<ravr££, airaoav O.VT& TTJV KTI](?IV
mv. Ant. lib. xx. cap. 4. sect. 4. vid. et Bell. p. 1072. v. 32.

VOL. I. X

306 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Ctesar and Herod. Some entry therefore must have been
made : and if St. Luke be understood to speak only of an
enrolment of names and persons, his account is confirmed
by Josephus as fully as one could wish.

And though it should be thought, that I have not fully
proved, that there was at this time a proper assessment made
in Judea ; yet I have, I think, shown undeniably, that about
this time that country was brought into a very strict sub
jection to Augustus : and herein also St. Luke and Jose
phus agree entirely.

I am sensible, that they who have hitherto supposed, that
Jesus was not born till a few weeks before the death of
Herod, will very unwillingly allow, that the oath in Jose
phus has any relation to St. Luke's enrolment. But then,
beside the task of evading all the many concurring circum
stances in St. Luke and Josephus, they will labour under
one very great difficulty. For this oath appears to have
been taken by the Jews so very near the end of Herod's
reign, that it will be utterly inconceivable, that the Romans
should have ordered another general enrolment, and harass
the people again before Herod's death. Nor will they be
able to remove this difficulty by saying, that the swearing
began about the time it is placed in by Josephus, but it was
not finished till a few weeks before Herod died ; for it was
all over at the time Josephus speaks of it. All had taken
the oath, but six thousand pharisees ; they had refused, and
were fined.

III. The third objection is this : Cyrenius was not go
vernor of Syria till nine or ten, perhaps twelve years after
our Saviour was born : therefore St. Luke has made a
mistake in saying, that this taxing happened in the time of
Cyrenius.

This objection must now be stated more at length. In
our translation the words are, " And this taxing was first
made, when Cyrenius was governor of Syria." What is
the sense of our translation, I do not know : and it must
be owned likewise, that the words of the original11 seem to
have in them an uncommon ambiguity. Many think, the
most genuine natural sense of the original words is, " This
first taxing [or enrolment] was made, when Cyrenius was
governor of Syria." Upon this sense of them the objection
is founded. And it is urged, this cannot be agreeable to
the truth : for the evangelists have assured us, that Jesus
was born in the latter end of Herod's reign. But Josephus

h Avrri n aTroypa^jj Trjowrty tymro rjytfJiovtvovToe Trig

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 307

says, that* Quintilius Varus was then president of Syria, and
he must have been so at least a year before Herod died ;
and Saturninus was his predecessor. Moreover, Josephus
says, that Cyrenius was sent governor into Syria, when
Archelaus was removed from his government of Judea,
who yet reigned there between nine and ten years after
Herod. Josephus relates this matter in his Antiquities
thus :

' But in the tenth yeark of Archelaus's government, the
' chief of the Jews and Samaritans, not being able to bear

* his cruelty and tyranny, accused him to Coesar. The em-

* peror sent an officer into Judea to bring him to Rome.
' When he came thither, Caesar, having heard what he had
' to say in answer to his accusers, banished him, appointing
' Vienna, a city in Gaul, for the place of his abode.1 And
' the country of Archelaus being annexed to the province

* of Syria, Cyrenius, a consular person, was sent by Caesar

* to make an assessment in Syria, and to seize Archelaus's

* estate.' ra

Afterwards he says, * In the mean time Cyrenius a Roman
' senator, who had served all other offices, and through
' them arrived at the consulship, and was distinguished

* likewise by divers other honours and dignities, came into

* Syria with a few troops, being sent thither by Coesar to
administer justice to that people, and to make an assess
ment of their goods. And Coponius a person of the
equestrian rank, was sent with him to govern in Judea
with supreme authority. Cyrenius also came into Judea,
now annexed to Syria, both to assess their estates, and to
seize Archelaus's effects and treasure.'11

It is objected, therefore, that St. Luke has committed a
very gross mistake, in saying, that " this taxing was made,
when Cyrenius was governor of Syria ;" since it appears from
Josephus, that Cyrenius was not president of that province

1 Joseph. Antiq. lib. xvii. cap. 5. sect. 2.

k At/car*^ de erei apxrjQ Ap^fXas. ' Ant. lib. xvii. cap.

15. sect. 2. ™ Trjg & Apx«Xa« XWP«C VTroreXaQ

7rpoavtfjiriQtiffr)G Ty 2upwj/, TTffjnrsTai Kupjjviof VTTO Kaicrapof, avrjp vtra.TiKOQt
Supta, icai ra Ap^tXas a7rodw<ro/-ifvog OIKOV. Ib. seel. 5.
T<OV ei£ rr\v figXiyv Gvvayontvwv avrjp, TO.Q re aXAa£ ap^ag erri-
, icai Sta Traffuv 6dtvcra£ viraroQ yevtaQai, rare a\\a a£iu>n*ara /ifyaf,
<ruvoXiyoi£ £7ri Svpicif 7rap»/i>, VTTO KctHTapoQ fiiKaiofioTqQ TS tOvsg aTTe^aX/jievoQ, KUL
riju//r»je T(I)V scriaiv jt vijoofievo^. Kw?rwvtog rf avry ffwy/cara7r«/i7rerat, ray/ta-
TOQ T(t)v ITTTTCWV, t'fytjffOfievoQ l&daiwv TIJ CTTI iraaiv &,&GIQ' Traprjv KGI Kvprjviog
tig rtjv Isdatwv 7rpoa9r]Krjv TTJQ 2upta^ yti'ojusj/jjj' aTrorijJiricrofjLfvog ft avrtov rag
SVIUQ, Kai aTro^wcro/iti'og ra Ap^cXas xprjfjiaTa. Antiq. lib. xviii. cap. 1.
sect. 1.

308 Credibility of the Gospel History.

till after the banishment of Archelaus, Herod's son and
successor.

To this I answer, that though the sense of the words, as
they now stand in St. Luke's g'ospel, should be supposed
inconsistent with this account taken from Josephus, yet it
would be unreasonable to conclude, that St. Luke had real
ly made any mistake. St. Luke appears in the rest of his
history, and from many particulars of this account before
us, to be so fully master of the state of Judea, and of the
nature of this aftair he is here speaking- of, that it is impos
sible he should commit any such mistake.

In the beginning of his third chapter, he has most ex
actly specified the state of all Judea, or the land of Israel,
as it was in the fifteenth year of Tiberius, by setting down
the several tetrarchs and governors of it, and the true extent
of their territories.

St. Luke understood the nature of enrolments, as made
by the Romans. The enrolment now made, was by virtue
of a decree of Augustus. And he says, that " Joseph went
to be taxed with Mary his espoused wife." This was the
custom of the Romans, as has been showed from undoubted
testimonies, to enrol women as well as men ; whereas the
Jews used to number or enrol males only.

Moreover, St. Luke appears to be well acquainted with
the census which Josephus gives us an account of. Gama
liel says, Acts v. 37, " After this man rose up Judas of
Galilee, in the days of the taxing, and drew away much
people after him : he also perished, and as many as obeyed
him, were dispersed." I think it may be fairly supposed,
that St. Luke understood what he has related from Gamaliel.
And then, here are particulars enough to satisfy us, he
wanted no information concerning the census which Jose
phus speaks of.

That Gamaliel here speaks of the census made in Judea
after the banishment of Archelaus, is evident, because it was
at that time, that Judas of Galilee raised a disturbance.
Gamaliel calls them " the days of the taxing," which im
plies, that this was a very noted and remarkable period ;
as it is certain it was.

Gamaliel here calls this Judas by his proper name : Jo
sephus does in one place call him Judas Gaulanites,0 but
he often styles him Judas the Galilean, or of Galilee.?
Gamaliel says, that he " drew away much people after him."

0 Ant. lib. xviii. cap. 1. p. 792. v. 3.

p 'O TaXiXatog ladac;, p. 974. 3. rig avrjp FaXiXaiOf, IsdctQ owfj,a' p.
1060. 8.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2, considered. 309

Josephus says the same thing of him in almost the same
words.*

Gamaliel does exactly specify the time in which this man
rose up, namely, in " the time of the taxing," or of the en
rolment : for Josephus says, * he persuaded not a few not to
' enrol themselves, when Cyrenius the censor was sent into
« Judea.'r

Gamaliel says, " he also perished, and all, even as many
as obeyed him, were scattered." Josephus has no where
related particularly the end of this Judas. But that his
enterprise was defeated at that time, we may be certain ;
otherwise the Roman government could not have subsisted
in that country with any quiet, which yet it did for near
sixty years after the banishment of Archelaus. Nor is there
after this any mention made in Josephus's history, of any
action or attempt of Judas.

Perhaps it will be here objected, that Gamaliel's words
imply, that this design of Judas was quite confounded, and
his principles sunk at once : and yet it seems likely, from
the uneasiness which the Jews express under the Roman
tribute in some places of the evangelists, that his principles
were in bein^ long afterwards : and from Josephus it ap
pears, that his notions are very prevalent, and were one
cause of their war at last with the Romans.

But if any so understand Gamaliel, they appear to me
very much to mistake the design of his argument. Doubt
less, it was not without special reason that Gamaliel alleged
these two instances ; and he speaks of each in a very dif
ferent manner. Of Theudas he says, " He was slain, and
all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered and brought to
nought : ^ie\vd^aav icai c^evovro ets udev they were ruined
and came to nothing. Of Judas he says, " He also perished,
and all, as many as obeyed him, were dispersed :" Sicfficop-
TriaOrjffav. Having mentioned these two instances, which the
council were well acquainted with, and thereby laid a
foundation for the advice he proposed to give, he goes on :
" And now I say unto you, refrain from these men, and let
them alone : for if this counsel or this work be of men,"
[as Theudas's was,] " it will come tos nought" [as his did].
" But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it, lest haply ye
be found even to fight against God."

Tt is not to be supposed, that Gamaliel should expressly

q E\£a£apoe ctTroyovoe Iu8a ra Triiffavrog ludaiwv 8/c oXiysg pr] Troieia9ai rag
#7roypa0ag, ore Kvpjjvtog TifjuirrjQ eig TTJV ladaiav eirt^Otj. De B. J. lib. vii.
p. 1313. v. 41. r Ibid, et p. 792. init.

310 Credibility of the Gospel History.

say, Judas's design was of God. However the chief men of
the Jewish nation might approve his principles, they were
wiser than openly to espouse them : they left that to the
common people.

The force of Gamaliel's argument is this : Theudas and
his measures came to nothing. After him Judas rose up ;
he himself perished, and his people were dispersed; but
yet his principles prevail. You likewise may now punish
these men, and put an end to their lives ; but if their prin
ciples be of God, they will prevail notwithstanding; and
all the issue will be, that you will contract guilt, fight
against God, but in vain.

And to this seems to be owing the great success of
Gamaliel's reasoning, and the service he did the apostles at
this time. He insinuates some hopes, that their design
might be of the same nature with Judas's. This may be
inferred from his way of expressing himself, " lest haply ye
be found to fight against God." This was Judas's peculiar
principle, that they were to own no mortal lords, but God
only.1 And it is not unlikely, that Gamaliel intended here
by to insinuate, not only that there was danger of their op
posing a design which came from God, and of opposing it
with no other effect, but that of contracting guilt to them
selves, but also of opposing the very kingdom and govern
ment of God, which they wished to be under.

It deserves likewise to be observed, that Gamaliel
mentions Theudas with contempt and indignation. * Before
6 these days rose up Theudas, boasting himself to be some-
* body :' but nothing like this follows the mention of
Judas.

Gamaliel concludes upon the whole, that they should
" let these men alone." We have no occasion to meddle in
this matter: it is not unlikely but the Romans, our present
governors, will be jealous of these men. But it seems to
me an affair we have no reason to concern ourselves in.

St. Luke therefore must be supposed to be well ac
quainted with the census made after the banishment of
Archelaus.

I must be permitted to observe farther, that St. Luke does
here call Cyrenius by his true name. It has indeed been a
dispute among learned men, whether his Roman name was
Quirinus or Quirinius: Onuphrius in his Fasti printed it
Quirinus; Grotiusu and Lipsiusv thought Onuphrius was
mistaken, and that it ought to be corrected Quirinius.

1 Jos. p. 1060. v. 10. u In Luc. ii. 2.

v In not. ad Tacit. Ann. 1. iii. c. 48.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 311

Perizoniusw seems to have proved, that Quirinus is the true
way of writing- it in Latin ; since it was not the family name,
or the nomen, but cognomen, the third name of this gentle
man ; for his name was Caitis Sulpicius Quirinus; and in
the Syriac version of St. Luke he is written Curinus, and in
the Latin vulgate Cyrinus. But however that be, he allows
it to be common for the Greeks to make some alteration in
the termination of Roman names, when they turn them into
their own language. It is certain, his name in all the Greek
authors has the termination of ios or ius ; Strabox and Dio^
call him Kvptvtos, Cyrinius ; but in Josephus2 his name is
always written, as in St. Luke, Cyrenius.

Moreover it is certain, Cyrenius was governor of Syria ;
and he has here a very proper title, by which he must have
been well known in Judea, and in all that part of the
world.

Lastly, if we consider that the words now before us are a
parenthesis, and that St. Luke calls the enrolment or census
he was speaking of, the first, we cannot well doubt, but
that the original intention of them was, in some manner or
other, to distinguish this enrolment, which was now made in
the reign of Herod, from that which was afterwards made
when Archelaus was banished.

He that will seriously consider all these particulars, will
have no suspicions that St. Luke has made any mistake.

If then the sense, which is now ordinarily given these
words, is not consistent with truth, it is highly reasonable
to conclude, that either we do not take the true meaning of
them, or else that some small alteration or other has hap
pened in the text of St. Luke.

IV. But though what has been here offered, and which
has also been in the main alleged before by those who have
considered this place, be sufficient to take away the force
of this objection, yet I presume it will be expected, I should
give some account of the particular solutions that have been
offered by learned men : this I shall do, and then endeavour
to support or improve that which appears to me the fairest.

1. One solution proposed bya Calvin, and much approved
by Salmeron and Baronius, is that Josephus was mistaken
in the account which he has given of Cyrenius. The two
last-mentioned writers especially are of opinion, that we
need pay little regard to Josephus, whose history, they say,

w Dissert, de Aug. Orb. Terr. Descr. sect. 30. x Lib. xii.

p. 854. y Vid. Dio. lib. liv. ad A. U. 742.

z Ant. p. 791. v. 5. 12. p. 794. v. 21. 37. et alibi. a In loc.

312 Credibility of the Gospel History.

abounds with mistakes and falsehoods.15 And Baronfus6
has taken some pains to make out a new series of the suc
cession of the governors of Syria about this time ; for he
thinks that Cyrenius was twice, if not thrice, president of
Syria : but this project can be but little approved by learned
men at present. No one that reads Joseph us without pre
judice, and that considers he had before him the history of
Herod's reign, written by Nicolas of Damascus, who was a
learned man, Herod's favourite, and employed by him in
affairs of government, can make any doubt, but that Quin-
tilius Varus was governor of Syria when Herod died ; that

C. Sentius Saturninus was his predecessor, and was in the
province at least two or three years ; and that M. Titius
was president before him. With all these governors of
Syria Herod had some concerns. What Josephus has said
of them may likewise be confirmed in a great measure from
other authors ;d so that there is no room for Cyrenius at this
time.

Nor can there well be any question made, but that Josephus
has given us, in the main, a true account of the enrolment
or census made by Cyrenius after Archelaus's banishment.
It appears from the manner in which Gamaliel speaks of the
taxing, when Judas of Galilee rose up, that it was a re
markable event : and the account Josephus gives of it may
assure us, this was an affair all men were then well ac
quainted with. The disturbance raised by Judas was sup
pressed, but yet the principle subsisted ; it was the occasion
of much uneasiness under the Roman government, and
many were at times punished on account of it.e

2. Another solution proposed byf Calvin, and which
Valesius& judgeth to be most commodious of any, is, that
the decree of Augustus was issued in the latter end of
Herod's reign ; but that for some reason or other the census
could not be made, or at least not finished, till the time that
Cyrenius was governor of Syria, ten or twelve years after
wards.

But this is to make St. Luke speak very improperly and
confusedly in what he says of Cyrenius, and it is directly

b Praestat ut Joseph! vero fidem et historiam deseramus, tanquam incertam,
et fluctuantem et veritati in multis dissentientem. Salmeron in Evang. T. iii.
Tractat. 32. c Sicque contra Josephi deliria

certo appareret, sub Augusto imperatore, vivente Herode seniore, reperiri
duplicem, immo triplicem, Quirinii in Syria praefecturam. Baron. Ann. A.

D. 3. Vid. etiam App. ad An. num. 80, 86.

d Vid. Noris. Cenot. Pis. Diss. ii. cap. 16. sect. 9, 10.

e Jos. Ant. lib. xviii. cap. 1. sect. 6. f Ubi supra.

» Vid. Notas ad Euseb. Hist. EC. lib. i. cap. 5.

Objeetions against Luke ii. 1, 2, considered. 313

contrary to what follows. Having related, that there " went
out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world
should be taxed," he subjoins : " And all went to be taxed,
every one into his own city." And there was so great a
resort at this time at Bethlehem upon this account, that
Joseph and Mary were obliged to take up with very indif
ferent accommodations : " there was no room for them in
the inn."

3. Some think, that instead of Cyrenius we ought to read
Saturninus ; because, according' to Josephus, he was pre
fect of Syria within a year or two before Herod died ; and
Tertullian says, this census was made by him. This is one
of the solutions proposed byh Valesius, though he rather
approves that last mentioned. But against this it has been
observed by many learned men, that Cyrenius is in all our
copies of St. Luke, and appears to have been there before
Tertullian's time ; since Justin Martyr says expressly, that
this census was made by Cyrenius.

4. Other learned1 men have thought it a very easy and
probable conjecture, that originally the name of St. Luke
was Quintilius. Quintilius Varus succeeded Saturninus,
and was in the province of Syria when Herod died. The
census afterwards made by Cyrenius was certainly best
known, and some ignorant transcriber might therefore ima
gine Quintilius a mistake, and pretend to correct the original
by inserting Cyrenius in his room. Besides, the alteration
of Quintilius to Cyrenius is a change of only a fewk letters,
and therefore might the more easily happen.

But this solution is liable to the same objection with the
former, that Cyrenius is in all the copies of the Greek ori
ginal, and in all the ancient versions ; and besides, has this
disadvantage, that this census St. Luke speaks of is not
ascribed to Quintilius Varus by any ancient Christian writer
whatever, whereas Saturninus has been mentioned by Ter
tullian.

5. The next1 I shall mention is that offered bym Mr.
Whiston, which is this : * That a description or enrolment of

* the Jews was made just before our Saviour's birth, but the

* tax itself was not raised till the banisliment of Archelaus,
' when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.' And Dr. Prideaux

h Ubi supra. ' Huet. Dem. Evang. Prop. ix. cap. 10.

Parker's Demonstration of the Truth of the Christian Religion, p. 219. 4to.

1681. k KvivTiXia —

1 I have passed by the conjecture of those who have supposed this whole
parenthesis to be an interpolation, as not deserving to be mentioned.

m A short View of the Harmony of the Evang. Prop. xi.

314 Credibility of the Gospel History.

seems to approve of this way of solving this difficulty.

For he says : ' If the second verse of the second chapter of
St. Luke be so rendered as to imply, that the levying the
tax, according to the description mentioned in the former
verse, was first executed while Cyrenius was governor of
Syria, this will remove all difficulties: and the text can
well bear this interpretation."1
In order to support this interpretation, Mr. Winston.

says :° ' The word used for the description at our Saviour's

' birth, is the verb airo<ypa<j>ofjLai, and that used for the taxa-

* tion under Cyrenius is the noun aTro^pa^.9 He adds, ' that

* by custom a noun of the same original with a verb does

* vary in signification from it. Tewperpeiv is to measure the
6 earth : Tewfie-rpia is geometry, or the science that consists

* of the knowledge of numbers and figures. — Nay, in
' English, in the words directly apposite to this matter, the
' verb to tax is oftentimes to lay an imputation, while the
' noun a tax is the levy of money only.'

But (1.) Mr. W n's argument from the use of nouns

and verbs is not valid here. He says : * By custom a

* noun with the same original with a verb does vary in sig-

* nification from it.' This may be, and there may be many
instances of it ; but it had been much more material to give
an example or two of the use of the noun cnro^paOr] for a tax,
namely, in the sense in which he here understands it. This
he has not done, and I presume no such example can be
alleged from any Greek author.

I know of but two, or at the most three senses, in which
this noun is used, which can have any relation to this
matter.

[1.] It is used for the act of the people in presenting
themselves to be enrolled ; as when soldiers offered them
selves to be enlisted P or enrolled under a general : and in a
census it may be used for the act of the people, who come
and offer themselves to be enrolled and assessed. So the
word seems to be used by Josephus, when he says in the

5 lace above quoted, that Judas persuaded not a fewq of the
ews not to take enrolments or entries : that is, not to offer
themselves to be entered and assessed.

£2.] The word is used for a census ; so it is used by Dio
in many places : aTroypacfias voieiffOai is the same as censum

11 Connex. Par. ii. 1. ix. Anno ante Ch. 5. ° Ubi supra.

P See above, p. 276. not. «. q E\£a%apog IsSa cnroyovog, r»

•xiiaavTOQ Isdaid)v SK oXtysg p,r) iroieiffQai rag a7roypa0a£. De B. J. 1. vii. p.
1343. 40.

Objections against Luke ii. 1,2, considered. 315

agere ; that is, to make enrolments is the same as to make
a census. r

[3.] This noun is used for the public rolls or court books
in which the entries were made : this sense of the word is
very common. Thus Caligula being at play at dice, and
having lost all his money, he asked for the Gallic court
rolls,8 and ordered several of the most wealthy of that peo
ple to be put to death, and seized their cash. And the
citizens of Rome, whose debts were more than they could
discharge, having entered the sums they owed in books
opened for that purpose, Servius Tullius took the books or
rolls, T«? a7ro<ypa(/)a<! e\a/3e, brought them into the forum, and
paid the creditors.1

Thus I have reckoned up all the senses I know of this
noun, relating to this matter ; however it never signifies a
tax. Taxes were paid according1 to the census, where any
had been made, but they were no part of it : they might be
remitted or demanded ; and the tribute is never expressed
by the noun aTro^paffir), but is ever distinguished from what
that signifies.11

(2.) This interpretation of these words is contrary to mat
ter of fact. There was no tax levied after the banishment
of Archelaus, according to the enrolment made at the birth
of our Saviour. But as soon as Archelaus was banished,

* Cyrenius came into Judeu to make an assessment of their

* goods.' Josephus is as express in this matter as can be:v

* Then it was that Judas of Galilee and his followers ex-
' claimed, that an assessment would bring in among them
' downright slavery.' w

This interpretation therefore is so far from being of any
service to us, that it would introduce a new, and I think
insuperable difficulty, by putting upon those words a sense
directly contrary to what Josephus has said.

Josephus is so express, that there seems no need of rea
soning upon the matter to confute this supposition. But I
can never conceive, how a tax could be levied in Judea,
after the removal of Archelaus, upon the census or enrol-

r HXrjv tv rctig a7roypcr0ai£. p. 509. C. Avrog 8e airoypatyctQ r<i)v ev ry
IraXiq. KaroiKuvTuv eTrowjcraro. 557. B. vid. etiam jam citat. pag. 496. C 508.
B. C. s 1K.v(3tv(i)v Se TTOT£, KO.I fiaOwv ort SK

eir] ol apyvpiov, yrrjae rt rag TUV TaXaruv aTroypot^af K. r. \. Dio. Jib. lix.
p. 657. B. l Dion. Hal. 1. iv. cap. 10. p. 207. 23.

Tov re 0opov TOV f.K T(i)v aTToypa^ajv cttyrjKt, reXjj TS nva Kart\v<re. Dio.

1. xlix. p. 401. B. v Uaprjv Ss Kvprjmos tiQ Ttjv

ludaiuv — aTTOTifirjffoufvog TS avruv TUQ saiaq. Ant. lib. xviii. cap. 1. sect. 1.

TTJV TS. aTTOTiiJLjjmv sdtv aXXo 77 avriKpvQ duXuav tTTiQtpiiv XeyovTtf. Id,

Ibid.

316 Credibility of the Gospel History.

ment made at our Saviour's birth, without the utmost con
fusion or the utmost injustice. When the enrolment which
St. Luke speaks of was made, Galilee, Trachonitis, and other
countries, were subject to Herod, beside Judea : many who
lived in Galilee enrolled themselves in Judea, particularly
Joseph, as St. Luke assures us. But when Archelaus was
banished, one half of Herod's dominions was in the posses
sion of Herod the tetrarch and Philip, and had been so ever
since the death of Herod called the Great : and only Judea,
Samaria, and Idumea, which had been subject to Archelaus,
were thrown into the form of a Roman province. The Jews
having* enrolled themselves according1 to their families at the
time of our Saviour's nativity, and many having* come into
Judea, properly so called, from Galilee, and other parts of
Herod's territories, a new enrolment was absolutely neces
sary in Judea at the time of Archelaus's removal, if they
were to pay tribute there in the way of a census ; Judea
otherwise must have been very much overburdened. If
there was an assessment of goods made at the latter end of
Herod's reign, undoubtedly Joseph's stock at Nazareth was
entered and rated at Bethlehem : and as the Jews in that
part of the world were chiefly of the tribes of Judah and
Benjamin, the inhabitants of Galilee, and Trachonitis, &c.
must have very generally enrolled themselves in towns that
belonged to the province of Judea. But it would have been
very unreasonable in the Romans to demand tribute of the
people of Judea, properly so called, for estates and goods
which were in the territories of the tetrarchs Herod and
Philip.

And we are assured, that the Romans did use to act
equitably and with great exactness in these matters. Many
of the Roman citizens had been for a long" time oppressed
with the weight of their debts. A way having1 been found
out, A. U. 402, to give them ease, Livy says, that the next
year a census was ordered, because the property of many
things had been altered. x

6. The solution 1 shall consider in the next place, is that
which was first offered by Herwaert :? I give it here in the
words ofz Whitby, by whom it is espoused. " And this
taxing was first made (before that made) when Cyrenius

x Quia solulio aeris alien! multarum rerum mutaverat dominos; censum agi
placuit. Lib. vii. cap. 22. n. vi. vid. et cap. 21.

y Ut hoc loco genitivus r^^ovtvovroQ vocabulo TrpuTrj additus, vim com-
parationis efficiat, et perinde sit, ac si diceretur description em illam esse priorem
priusque factam, quam Quirinius Syriae praeficeretur, prsefecturamque ipsius
gereret. Herwaert. Nova et Vera Chronologia, Monachii, 1612. p. 189.

« In loc.

Objections against Lulie ii. 1,2. considered. 317

was governor of Syria : or rather, This taxing" was made
before Cyrenius was governor of Syria." The learned Kep-
lera approved of this interpretation, as perfectly agreeable
to the genius of the Greek language; notwithstanding
whichb Casaubon rejected it, and was supposed by most to
have confuted Herwaert's arguments for it. Perizonius, in
his dissertation upon this subject of the taxing, has afresh
supported this interpretation. Mr. Le Clerc, in his addi
tions to Dr. Hammond's annotations, expresses his approba
tion of it; and has since declared/ that he thinks it has
been set in so clear a light as to be incontestable. And it
is now embraced by many other learned men, both protes-
tants and catholics.

I am very desirous this solution should appear here to as
much advantage, as an argument so full of Greek criticisms
can do in a design of this nature in our own language.
Perizonius allows, that a great many of Herwaert's instances
are not to thed purpose. I reckon, therefore, that it will be
sufficient to represent this argument as it is drawn up by
Whitby and Perizonius ; especially if I take in by the by
an instance or two, insisted on by others, though neglected
by them.

Whitby says : * I would rather read npo T^ than irpwrt].
But neither do we need this criticism, since the words Trpw-
TO? and Trporepos are by the Seventy oft used according to
this sense ; of the word irpovepov, this is beyond doubt, God
saying* twice aTrocneXw o-0?;/aas TrpoTepa? <r«, " I will send hor-
nets before thee," Exod. xxiii. 28; Jos. xxiv. 12. — That
7r/>wT09 also is used in the sense of priority we learn from
these instances ; TrpunoTOKo^ c^w y av, I am before thee, I

am elder than thou ; KO.I Iva 71 UK e\o^ia6rj 6 Xo^os /JLS TrpWTOs •

Chal. *h tfn^czno, " Why then was not the word first spoken
tome?" Cur mihi non annunciatum est priori? 2 Sam.
xix. 43; Isa. xlv. 16. " The former troubles are forgot

ten," Gr. e7Ti\r]ffovTai TVJV 6\i\jriv aviwv TTJV irpwrrjv, and ver.

17, s prj pvwaOwffi TWV 7rpo™pwv9 " they shall not remember
the former." So John, i. 15, 30, on TT/WTO? //« yv9 " for he

a Cum igitur omnium Greece doctorum judicio constet sic optime versum
esse hunc locum Lucae, multoque emendatius quam habet antiqua versio,
spero omnes acquieturos hac solutione objectionis prius propositae. De Natal.
J. Chr. p. 116, 117. b Exerc. in Baron, i. n. 32.

fc Ce denombrement se fit avant que Quirinius fut gouverneur de la Syrie.
De savans homines ont mis cette explication de ce passage de St. Luc dans un
si grand jour, qu'elle paroit desormais incontestable. Nouv. Testam.

d Interpretationem hanc primus protulit Job. Georg. Herwaertus, multisque
argumentis, vel potius exemplis, probare laboravit, sed in quibus non pauca
attulit valde cnrpoadtovvaa. Periz. De August. Descript. sect. 21.

318 Credibility of the Gospel History.

6 was before me." And chap. xv. 18, " know that they
* hated, epe Trpwror, me before' you." 1 Cor. xiv. 30, o Trpia-
' TO?, " Let the former hold his peace ;" and 1 John iv. 19,
4 " We love him, on TT/XUTOS, because he loved us before."
4 And in Aristophanes, a\\' SK av irpu^s is interpreted aXV «/c
t av Trporepov Neph. p. 122. And so Theophylact interprets

' the word here. T«Tecm Trporepa yyepovevovTos, e*{8v irporcpov
6 rj i)<ye[jioi>eve TTJS 2vpms Ki'/o^vto?.'

Perizonius understands these words in much the same
sense6 with Whitby ; only he differs from him and Her-
waert, in that they suppose TT^WT^ to be the same as Trporepa;
whereas he says, these numeral adjectives have the force of
ad verbs. f

He alleges divers of the same examples which Whitby
does, particularly John i. 15, and xv. 18. Of the latter, <m
efie TTpia-rov vfjLiav /LLejuiffrjKe, he says, it must by all means be
understood s of priority of time: "It hated me before it
hated you."

He supposes also11 that we have a parallel instance in a
word of an opposite meaning-, 2 Mace. vii. 41, ea^a-r^ rwv
vlwv y firf-n^p eTeXev-nytre. Last of all after the sons the mother
died. In the same manner is vp^-rov the adverb used in
Aristophanes in avibus, v. 484. de Gallo ; »/p%e ^e irpwrov
Aa/aets KCII Me7a/3f^8, i. e. imperabatque Persis priusquam
Darius et Megabyzus ; vel ante Darium et Megabyzum.

Perizonius says, that the genitives that follow TT/DWTO? are
governed by an ellipsis,1 and that TT/>WTOV ^Q is the same as

e Verus itaque mea sententia verborum sensus est : Haec descriptio prius, vel,
ante, facta est, quam preesideret Syriae Quirinius. Dissertatio de Augusti orbis
terrarum Descriptione, sect. 21.

f Voluit autem Herwaertus Trpwri? poni O.VTI TS Trporepa, atque hujus locu-

tionis vi genitivum, qui sequitur, a ry Trpwr??, tanquam a comparative, regi.
Durum hoc plerisque visum. Ego rem aliter expediendam omnino censeam.
Iljowrj? simpliciter, ut adjectivum numerate jungitur verbo, quemadmodum
solent adjectiva habitum vel modum rei gestae significantia, tanquam si sint
adverbia.— Sic plane Trpwroj, verbis adjunctum, saspe significat solam ordinis
et numeri rationem, sine discrimine, pluresne sint, an unus, qui sequantur j
atque adeo tune non tarn superlativi, quam positivi naturam induit, eandem-
que subit constructionem, quam dtvrepoc, et seq. Ibid. sect. 22.

* Vertendum omnino cum significatu temporis, me primum ante vos. Ib.
et sect. 23. h Ibid. j Nempe genitivi hi

non reguntur ab adjectivis, sed a prapositionibus, quaa per ellipsin sunt omis-
sae, sect. 24. IIpo enim esse particulam, qua3 in ista locutione desideratur, et
a qua regitur genitivus, certissimum ex eo, quod ubi ellipsis nulla, et sententia
plene ac integre exponitur, ilia potissimum occurrit expressa. Apud. Anton.
Liber, fab. 29. Kai TT/OO 'HpafcXia^ eoprrj Srvsoi TaXivQiaSt Trpwry. Galinthias
ibi optime dicitur merita fuisse de Hercule, et idcirco Thebanos in festo Her-
culis sacrificare Galinthiadi prius, seu primae, ante Herculem. — Sed et ipse
Lucas Evang. xi. 38. expressit similiter TO npo Trpwrog, 6 SE Qapiffaioe, inquit,

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2, considered. 319

frpwros Trpo jU8, irpiDTOS v/Jitvv the same as TrpWTO'S Trpo vp.it) i\

Thus in Luke xi. 38. " He wondered," on a Trpwrov epaTr-
7iff0r] Trpo apiff-TH, " that he had not washed before dinner."
From this and another such instance he concludes, that the
genitive is governed by Trpo understood, when it is wanting.

This is the substance of the argument in favour of this
meaning of this passage of St. Luke.

It has been thought by some to be an objection against
this solution, that then St. Luke has omitted to name the
person by whom this enrolment was made ; but methinks
this is a defect which may be dispensed with, if that be the
only difficulty. For my own part I dare not absolutely
reject it ; but yet I am not fully satisfied that this is the
sense of the words. I think myself obliged to review the
arguments here offered by these learned men, and hope it
may be done without offence.

Whitby's instances of the use of Trpo-repot and TrpoTepov
from the Seventy are not to the point, because the word in
St. Luke is rrpwrrj. There is no doubt but Trpo-repo?, the
comparative, is very often followed by a genitive case, and
denotes such or such a thing to be before another ; we want
some plain examples of this use of TT/^TOS* nor is Trpwro-roicos
eryw ij av to the point, because the ?/ is wanting in St. Luke,
and the construction is different. The example from Isa.
Ixv. 16, only proves that TT/JWTO? signifies the former: and
though Trpivrij in St. Luke should be so rendered, the diffi
culty will remain in its full force. For then the sense will
be, " This former taxing was made when Cyrenius was go
vernor of Judea." Nor can the TT/^TO? in 1 Cor. xiv. 30, or
1 John iv. 19, do us any service, for want of a regimen
equivalent to what we have in our text ; nor do I see what
use can be made of the phrase borrowed from Aristophanes.
The passage from 2 Sam. xix. 43, as it is quoted by Kcu-
chenius,k seems to me more strongly to support this inter-

on a irpurov f^aTTTiaQrj Trpo TS apirs' quod non primum
se laveret, antequam cibum sumeret. Vides utrobique post Trpainj et Trpwro»>,
ante genitivum expressam hanc proepositionera ; quod certo est indicio, ab ea
etiam regi, quando nulla comparet, oraissa per t\\ti$/iv, sed tamen inteiligen-
da : atque adeo explicandum etiam Trpwroj/ Aapas, quasi dictum esset Trpwrov
Trpo Aapaa r'i cnroypaQij report) Kvprjvm quasi Trpwrj/ Trpo Kvpqvia. sect. 25. —
mihique idem est, ac si dixisset Lucas, non quidem Trponpa rjytfiovsvovToz,
verum Trpurrj Trpo >/y6/iov£vovrof. — Sed nihil similius, quod ad constructions
et linguae rationem, Lucse verbis secundum nostram eorum interpretationem,
quam locus LXX. interpretum Jerem. xxix. 1. OVTOI o\ Xoyoi, OVQ cnrt<zti\tv
lepepiag «£ Ea(3v\a)va v^epov I£,I\QOVTOQ l^ovis &, 'lepaffaXrifj.. Haec sunt
veiba, quae misit Jeremias Babylonem, postquam exiit Jechonias ex Hieroso-
lymis, sect. 28. k Silentio tandem praeterire nequeo,

quod 2 Sam. cap. xix. 43, legitur, Et vir Israelis respondit viro Judae, et dixit,

320 Credibility of the Gospel History.

pretation, than as it is quoted by Whitby, though I suppose
he had his reasons for quoting it in that way ; nor has Pe-
rizonius quoted this text, though he had Keuchenius before
him. It is observable, that Isda is wanting in ] Grabe's edi
tion of the Scptuagint, as there is nothing answerable to it
in the Hebrew : his instances from St. John's gospel will
be distinctly considered presently.

The first quotation in Perizonius [sect. 23.] which I shall
consider is John xx. 3, 4. " Peter therefore went forth, and
that other disciple, and came to the sepulchre. So they
ran both together, and the other disciple did out-run Peter,"
teat r)\0e Trpw-ro? eis TO fiii>v]/u.eiov, " and came first to the sepul
chre." Which Perizonius would render thus : And came
first, or before Peter ; and says, that the meaning cannot be
" came first of all," TT/DWTO? TTOI/TW^, because Mary Magdalene
had been there before. No, for certain, it is not, came first
of all, because two only are here spoken of; and omnium
primus is not properly said of two. But I wonder Perizo
nius did not perceive the proper ellipsis in this place, and
which is very obvious, namely, TOU> Svoiv, and came the first
of the two. Perizonius does not deny, that TT/JWTOS is used
where two only are spoken of; nay, he contends for it.
But because it is often denied,™ and because his proofs ap
pear to me not very clear, or at least not so fully to suit my
interpretation of this text, I shall give two undoubted ex
amples. Thus" Dionysius says, that Servius Tullius's wife
was daughter of Tarquin the first, though there were but
two Tarquins kings of Rome. Plutarch thus describes a
restless uneasy mind. ' If he is a native of a province, of
' Galatia for instance, or Bithynia, he thinks he is not well
' used, if he has not some eminent post among his citizens.
' If he has that, he laments that he has not a right of wear-
* ing the patrician habit : if he has that, he grieves that he is
' not a Roman preetor : if he is prsetor, that he is not consul :

Mihi sunt decem partes in rege, ubi LXX. de suo addere videntur, KUI 7rp<o-
TOTOKog eyw t\ av, et etiam in David ego pree te : cur igitur me vilipendisti, et
non fuit verbum nieum primum seu prius (inter duos enim sermo est) mihi ad
reducendum regem meum ; quod LXX. vertunt, KCLI UK t\oyia9r) 6 \oyog pa
7rpwro£ juoi TS IzSa E7ri0rp£i//ai TOV j8a<riXfa spot ; ubi irpuToq TS IsSa mani-
fesle ponitur pro TrporepoQ. Petri Keuchen. annot. in loc.

1 Kai UK £\oy«T07/ 6 \oyog ps Trpwroe /xoi TS tTTi^pt^ai TOV (3am\ta f/iot.

m Ilpwrof jcafc Trportpof £ia0£pti' 7rpa»ro£ yap CTTI 7ro\Xu>v, Trportpog de tirt
$vo. Ammon. de Sim. et Diff. ap. H. Steph. Thes. Gr. in Appendice.

n TapKvvis SwyaTrjp s<ra T« Trpwrs fiaffiXewQ. Dionys. Hal. Antiq. p. 234.
v. 13. conf. p. 250. v. 42. on Tap/cwis TS Trportpov fia(n\tvffavroQ
'Pb)fj,(u(i)V adtXtys jraie rjv. et p. 253. 10. TS Trportpov jSaaiXewf Tapicvvis

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 321

* and if consul, that he was not declared first, but0 only the
« latter (of the two).'

This text then will not help Perizonius. All that can
be proved from it is, that TT/JWTOS is used very properly where
two only are spoken of; if Trpwr^ in St. Luke be allowed
to signify the first or former of two taxings, all that will
result from hence is, that St. Luke thought there was an
other taxing beside this ; and that this now made by Cyre-
nius was the former of the two. No instance of this sort
will prove, that the meaning of this passage is, this taxing-
was before, or prior to, that made when Cyrenius was go
vernor of Syria.

The examples from John i. 15, 30, xv. 18, are some of
the most proper examples in the whole number ; and if they
are rightly understood, they are very much to the purpose.
But, with submission to these learned men, I think they are
taken by them in a wrong sense. They are both much of
the same kind ; but I choose to consider first of all that al
leged from John XV. 18. Et o /cooyios v/u.as fiiffeiy eyivwffKere

071 eywe Trpwjov v/jLtav /acpiffriKev' " If the world hate you, know
that it hated me before it hated you." Herwaert? is much
pleased with this example.

If TTpvo-Tov be supposed to be an adverb, then this is not a
parallel instance : but indeed, as I take it, it is neither an
adverb, nor an adjective, but a noun substantive ; or at least,
an adjective used substantively ; and the latter part of the
verse ought to be rendered, Know that it has hated me your
chief. The connexion of the words may satisfy us, that this
was our Saviour's meaning. His argument is, that men had
hated him, who was superior to them ; nay, they had hated
even his Father ; the disciples therefore ought not to be
surprised if they hate them also, v. 20, " Remember the
words that I said unto you, the servant is not greater than
his lord ; if they have persecuted rne, they will also perse
cute you." V. 24, " But now they have both seen and
hated me and my Father." The force of the argument is
not, that the world had hated him before it hated them ;
but he bids them consider, that it hated him who was their
master, and whom they allowed to be so. This is the ar
gument made use of in other places with the same view,
Matt. x. 24, 25, " The disciple is not above his master, nor
the servant above his lord. — If they have called the master

"Eav Sf. Kai Trparjjywv, on prj vTrarevfi' Kai vTTctTEVbiV, on pr] Trpwrof, aXX'
vzipoQ avrjyopivOr]. J^lutarch. de Anim. Tranq. p. 470. c.

P Ille vero S. Joannis xv. 18. locus ad hoc institutum mirifice facit, — Si
mundus vos odit, scitote qnia me priorem vobis odio habuit.
VOL. I. Y

322 Credibility of the Gospel History.

of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them
of his household T'

If it be said, that there was no occasion to subjoin ' your
' chief after * me,' and that the disciples could consider
Jesus no otherwise than as their master ; I answer, that it
is apparent from the texts already alleged here by me, that
this was not our Saviour's style ; and that he did not trust
so much to his disciples' understandings. When he had
occasion to draw any inferences from his superiority, he al
ways expresseth it. John xiii. 14, " Ye call me Master,
and Lord, and ye say well : for so I am. If I then your
Lord and Master have washed your feet, ye ought also to
wash one another's feet."

n/oan-os is used several times in the New Testament, in the
plural number, for superiority of honour and dignity : Kat
TCHS Trpwrois TI?S FaXtXam?, is not ill rendered in our version,
Mark vi. 21, " chief estates of Galilee :" ^waLKtav re -rwv Trpw-
-rwv UK oXtrya?, " of the chief women not a few," Acts xvii.
4 ; or, as perhaps the words might be rendered, not a few
of the wives of the chief men.

It is likewise used in the singular number in the same

sense. Kat os eav OeX.vj ev vpiv eivai TT^WTOS, earo vfiwv £sXos,>*

Matt. xx. 27, " And whosoever will be chief among you,
let him be your servant." There is another unexception
able instance of this use of the word : Acts xviii. 7, Ev 8c
Tot? -- vTT'rjp^e ^wpia TW Trpwrw 7779 vrjffs* " In the same
quarters were possessions of the chief' man of the Island."
Grotius, in his annotations upon this place, has exhibited a
Greek inscription found in this very island of Melita, a part
of which inscription is thus : A. K. KIO2. HiriEYS. POM.
HPQTOS MEAITAIQN. L. C. Kius, Roman knight, chief of
the Melitenes.

The word is often so used in the septuagint version :
TT/OWTO? ruov TpiaKovra, chief of the thirty, 1 Chron. xi. 11.
Kat Affa<p Trpwros rvw adovnav, Neh. xii. 46, and in inanv
other places. And in Josephus : ISO-TOS o IL0T* TTCUS o 7^
TyuT^? jicpiSos TTpivros, Justus the son of Pistus, chief or leader
of the third faction in^ Tiberias. I throw an example or
two more from otherr authors into the margin.

Nor do I see, why TT/SWTOS should not be allowed to be
used substantively in divers of the places I have produced.

q Joseph, in Vit. p. 907. v. 12. r TOJ> rade rraida tovrog

ap'f/zoi* K. X. Herodot. 1. i. c. 115. ijv dt avi\$ a?o£, Kat 6 irpuTOQ
, K. X. Ibid. c. 173. Kat ETra/ztvaiv^ag j3otwrap^a»v, ev AcuKrpoif tvt-

feat rwv 'Pw^atajv [Qrjpaiuv legit Perizonius] feat rwv
. H.

'E\\r)vuv TTpwroQ tycvcro. Lilian. Var. H. vii. 14.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 323

Princeps in Latin is properly an adjective, and is often so
used ; at other times it is a substantive. AvvoKpcnwp is
sometimes an9 adjective ; it is also used substantively : no
one will deny it. 'YTraros is a word very near parallel with
7r/>orros ; is often an adjective, at other times is used sub
stantively, and denotes a consul.

I come now to the other instance, John i. 15, OVTO? yv ov

ei7Toi>9 o oTTiffii) [18 ep^ofievo^ e^nrpoadev [18 <ye^fovev9 on Trpwro^ /us

rjv " This was he of whom I spake, He that coineth after
me is preferred before me." The same words occur again,
ver. 30, with little variation ; but the last clause ought not,
in my opinion, to be rendered, " for he was before me," but,
" for he is my Prince or Lord."

What I have already said in favour of this meaning of
7r/>wT09 in the former instance, may, I presume, make way
for admitting it here.

I apprehend John to say ; He that follows me, or comes
behind me, was always before me, or in my view, for he is
my Prince. E^Trpoadev and OTTHTU) (unless I am much mis
taken) are never used in the New Testament for priority or
posteriority of time, nor for superiority or inferiority in re
spect of dignity, (unless they are so used here in the case
of John the Baptist,) but always have a regard to place.
" For we must all appear before the judgment-seat of

Christ," 2 Cor. V. 10, E/Lnrpoff0ev T« fiij/UHno? 78 X/3t<TT«. " I

said unto Peter before them all," Gal. ii. 14, E/t7r/>o<r0ei/ TTCU/-
TICV. " Forgetting the things which are behind, and reach
ing forth unto those things which are before," Phil. iii. 13,

Ta fjiev oTTiffta e7ri\av9avoju,evos9 rot? $e e^TrpoaOev

and efjurpoadev are frequently used the one for the
other. See Matt. x. 33, Luke xii. 9. It is true, John came
before Christ, that is, before his face. He went before him
as an officer before a great man ; but that is expressed here

in OTTMTU) [18 6/3%0/161/OS.

But I will not contend about this. Perhaps e[nrpoff0ei> ps
<ye<yovcv is not ill rendered in our translation, * is preferred
* before me,' though it appears to me an unusual sense of
the word.

However, TT^WTOV /JLS must nevertheless be understood as
I render it. And I learn from Beza,* that others have been
of the same opinion before me.

Thus then John says, toward the conclusion of his minis
try, " Ye yourselves bear witness, that I [from the begin-

s Aafiuv Tr}v avroKparopa ap%^v. Dionys. Hal. 1. vii. p. 408. v. 1.
1 Quamobrem etiam nonnulli Trpwroe /is interpretantur Princeps meus:
quod mihi penitus insolens videtur. Bez. in loc.

Y 2

324 Credibility of the Gospel History.

ning] said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent before
him," John iii. 28. Referring to what he had declared at
first : " I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness,
Make straight the way of the Lord," ch. i. 23. That is, I
came not on my own account, but barely as a harbinger
that makes way for his Lord. This is the peculiar charac
ter of John, under which he was prophesied of, Isa. xl. 3;
Mai. iii. 1 ; iv. 5, and under which he always speaks of him
self. And what in the 15th and 30th verses of this 1st
chapter of John, is on TT/JWTO? /*« yv, He is my prince, is in
the 27th verse represented by an expression that denotes
the vast superiority of Christ above him ;u " He it is, who
coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe's latchet
I am not worthy to unloose :" that is, I am so far inferior
to him, and am in so low a post under him, that 1 am not
worthy to perform the meanest office about his person : or,
in other words, I am a mere harbinger, and he is my Lord.
Athenagorasv has used this word in this very sense of a
prince or chief.

I hope it will be no objection against this interpretation,
that then the words would not have been TT^WTOS /an ^v, but
eff-uv for these are all one and the same. 1 need go no
further for proof than these two verses : oin-oe qv ov enrov in

the 15th - in the 30th is OVTOS GO-TI irepi ov e<yu) enrov. So that

ijv and c(m signify the very same thing, and are used one
for the other.

I am indeed aware, that some grammarians will except
against my notion of TT/JWTO? being a substantive : 1 will then,
for the present, suppose it to be an adjective ; but yet I
cannot part with the interpretation I have given of either of
these texts. The context satisfies me the sense I affix to
the words is the true meaning ; and I can, if I mistake not,
account for it according to the strictest rules of the gram
marians. Let then Trpwrov, in John xv. 18, be inclusive, and
be understood partitively, and v^wv will be governed by
the ellipsis e£ ; this I suppose will not be contested : but
I choose to understand Trpwrov here exclusively. I think
that is the best sense, and then the ellipsis may be

u Avrog e^iv 6 O7rt(rw /its £jO%o/i6vo£» 6f ffji7rpoa6ev fj,s ytyovtv' ov tyw SK eifju
aZ,iOQ iva Xvffio avrs rov i(j,avra TS VTrodrjfiaroQ.

v TIpoffrjKe de Ttp p,ev TO TrowTtvuv Kara tyvaiv, TQ de copvtytpetv TOV ITPQ-
TON, ofioTTOieiv TZ KO.I Trpoavep-yeiv TTCLV OTTOCFOV einroSwv Kai TrpoffavrsQ' De-
cet enim hoc secundum naturam principatum habere, illud autem, satellitis
vice, principi suo viam facere, et praevio cursu, omnia impedimenta et prae-
rupta tollere. De Resur. p. 50. D. Paris. 1636.

w Perizonius says, sect. 24, Apud Graecos hanc vicem praestant praeposi-
tiones Trpo et 7r«pi, quarum ilia respondet ry ante, haec ry prae. II/oo is also

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 325

£7rt, or whatever else the grammarians like best, YIpw-
in John i. 15, 30, is evidently exclusive, according to
my way of rendering it; and the p* following is governed
by an ellipsis of one of the last-mentioned prepositions.
This I take to be perfectly agreeable to the rules of the
grammarians : and thus, in one place, Jesus tells his disci
ples, that he was chief above them ; and in the other, John
the Baptist says, that Jesus was prince or chief above him.
And now 1 have Beza on my side, with reference to John i.
15, for though he would not allow, that TT/JUJTOS pa is ' my
* prince,' yet he says,x after a very careful examination, he
is convinced, it expresses the vast excellence and superi
ority of Christ above John. I am not singular therefore in
supposing, that this text does not express directly and
simply priority of time, but only virtually and consequen
tially, as it is implied and comprehended in the superior
dignity of which it is a part.

There is another Trpwrrj in the New Testament, which has
been understood by some in the same sense in which these
learned men have taken the two former instances, though
it is not alleged by them. Matt. xxvi. 17, Mark xvi. 12,
" Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread." This
was the fourteenth day of the month : but it is argued here,
that the fifteenth day was the first day of the feast of un
leavened bread ; for Josephus says, that the sixteenth day
of the month was^ the second day of the feast ; and the
words of the law agree herewith. " And in the fourteenth
day of the first month is the passover of the Lord. And in
the fifteenth day of this month is the feast. Seven days
shall unleavened bread be eaten," Numb, xxviii. 16, 17.
See Exod. xii. 18. The fourteenth day therefore was the
day of the passover : the feast of unleavened bread M-as
distinct from it, and lasted seven days from the fourteenth
at night ; the fifteenth day of the month was the first of
unleavened bread. Therefore when the evangelists, speak
ing of the fourteenth day, say, it was Trpivrtj -nav a'gvpwv, they

used to denote preference and pre-eminence, both simply and in composition.
Simply : Kai QVTOQ iroifjitjv a.7ro$tiKi'vrat SiavoictQ, rvfyov TTQO a\r]9tiag aotra^o-
fifvrjg, KO.I Trpo m etvai TO SoKtiv aTroSt^ofitvrig. Philo. p. 193. D. vid. et p.
194. D. In composition : in 7rpoe<rwe, Trpon/uaw, &c.

x Caeterum hoc loco diligentius expense, quam antea.— Declarat igitur
prsestantiam, sed Christo peculiarem, et ipsi propriam : nempe quasi diceret
Joannes : Qui me sequitur, quasi magistrum praeeuntem discipulus quispiam,
mini antepositus est, idque optimo jure, quia infinitis modis est prsestantior j
quamvis ante docere cceperim quam ille sese mundo patefecerit. In loc.

y Ty Se StvTtog, TWV a^vfjitujv (tifjitpct- fieri/ cT t<=rij/ avrrj Kat foicarj;.) Antiq,
lib. hi. cap. x. p. 124. v. 20.

326 Credibility of the Gospel History.

mean not the * first* day of unleavened bread, but the day
' before ' that feast.

The .lews have; a rule, that in the computation of feasts,
the day7 precede! the night: what stress ought to be laid
upon this rule in this rase I know not, I am satisfied we do
not need it. The passover was, strictly speaking, distinct
from the feast of unleavened bread, and seven days of un
leavened bread followed the day of the passover: but their
houses were cleansed from all leaven on the morning of the
day on which the paschal lamb was slain, and therefore after
noon they could eat no leavened bread. For this reason,
perhaps, the day of the passover was called the first of un
leavened bread ; but whatever was the reason of it, it is
certain, that the passover and the feast of unleavened bread
are ofien taken promiscuously the one for the other. And
though Josephus, in the particular account of the institution,
distinguishes the passover from the feast of unleavened bread,
yet lie often calls the one the other. * Ata that time,' says
he, ' the feast approaching1, in which the Jews are wont to
' eat unleavened bread : the feast is called the passover, it
' being kept in remembrance of their departure out of
' Kgypt.' And in one place he says, ' we keep the1' feast
< of unleavened bread eight days.' According to this me
thod of computation, the fourteenth day was the first of
unleavened bread : so that when the passover and feast of
unleavened bread were considered as one, (as they were
very often,) and the whole was called by the feast of un
leavened bread, the fourteenth day must be the first. The
evangelists perhaps do not write in system ; nor does Jose
phus, as it seems, nor indeed any other good writers, but
according to the usual way of speaking.

Herwaert* lays great stress upon a passage of Athenaeus,

" Quum antcm Matt. xxvi. 17. et Marc. xiv. 12, ipse dies 14. Nisan appel-
latur primus die -s azymorum. Intelligendum id est secundum canonem Jiidui-
oruin, inox 1ra< lit urn, scilicet in sacris comedendis diem praecedere uoctem;
sic ut trmpus vrspcrlimim diei 14, et nox subsequens hoc modo diei 14 ac-
Rcland. Autiq. Heb. p. 422.

fit Kara rovSt TOV Kaipov topT1Jft iv -ft IH$CUOIQ «£u/ia TrponOtnOai
Harriet fit »'/ to^rrj KaXtirat V7rop.vr]fia sact TVIQ t% AiyvirTH cnrapanoQ
yn'o/,tM'j/r. Antiq. lib. xvii. cup. 9. sect. 3. p. 773. v. 25. vid. et p.
<JOJ). v. 51.887. Y, 10.

b 'O0tv fiij jjivrjfirjv Trjr; rore evfitiac ioprr]V ayofjitv t<f> r)p.fpct£ o«r^>, TIJV TIOV
(tZnH«n> \tyonfvi]v. A\\\\(\. lib. ii. cap. 15. p. 88. itiil.

' I lie vcro locus Arislolt'lis c:4 singulai'is. J-liim rerensct Allinucus, Lib. xi.
p. 505. If^jo yap avTH [Tl\arii)VOf] ruff fj'/pe TO ei8o£ Tdtv Xoywv 6 Tifiof
wj; NtKtrtf 6 NifcatWj; iToptt Kai 2a»r»j()ia»i/. AplfOTf\lf£ fit tv T(p
t TcoirjTwv OVTWQ ypa<j)ti, OVKHV sdt t/ijwerpac Tȣ KaXuntv
fjxtfjitv nvai XoyHj,1 K(ti mp.i]rrti£, r/ THQ AXtZajitvH T» Tij'iti TUQ

Objections ayainsl Lake ii. 1, 2, Considered. 327

who quotes Aristotle, saying1, (as Jlcrwacrt understands (lie
words,) that Alexamenus's dialogues were written before
the Socratic dialogues; Qhat is, the dialogues in which
Plato introduces Socrates •] expressly affirming-, says Athe-
n&eus, that Alexamenus wrote dialogues before Plato.

But it is very plain to me, that Aristotle says, that Alex-
amenus's dialogues were the first Socratic dialogues; that
is, that Alexamenus was the inventor of that way of writing.
I have transcribed the passage of Athenoeus more at length
than Herwaert has done : and if the reader will consider the
whole of it, I think he will be convinced, 1st, That by
Socratic dialogues is here meant, not Plato's dialogues, in
which he introduces Socrates, but in gem nil that way of
writing*: and 2dly, That Aristotle says, that Alexamcnus's
dialogues were the'1 first of the kind. From whence Athe-
nneus infers very justly, that Aristotle says expressly, that
Alexamenus wrote dialogues before Plato.

I think likewise, that Athenoeus never dreamed of that
meaning- of Aristotle's words, which Herwaert affixes to
them. Interpret Aristotle as Jlenvaert does, and Athenoeus
is guilty of a ridiculous tautology in his inference.

That I understood Aristotle right, is farther evident from
Diogenes Laertius, whose words upon the same subject are
thus : * Some say, that Zeno the Elean was the first writer

* of dialogues, but Aristotle, in his first book of Poets, says,

* that Alexamenus the Teian was, as does also Phavorinus
' in his Commentaries.'6

But though I contest all these instances, (as thinking I
have given the true meaning1 of all those places,) it must be
allowed, that Pcrizonius's example from Aristophanes, and
another from Alexander Aphrodisius/ alleged by others in
this cause, prove that TT^IOTOI/, used adverbially, is put with
out 777)0 following it to denote the priority they contend for.

2wKpariKa>v ^taXoyojv* avTiicpvc ^XWKMV o TroXwjua&Tarof Apirr-
TortXrjg irpo IlXarwvoj; dtaXoym.; y*y(>«0tJ'ai TOV AXt^a^tvov. Uaec quidrm
AthenuL'us: ubi sane verba ilia Anstutclis r«f Trpuruc ypaQtvrac TUV Sw^xrrt-
KCJV &aXoywi>, AthenaDus hiscc interpretatur : [T-HC Trportpov] Trpo HXarwvoc
&aXoyH£, K. r. X. Plato cnim in snis dialogs introducit Socralcin (jui hortc-
tur juvenes, sophistas rcdarguat, virosdoceat; unde hand immerito vocantur
Socratici.— Quern admoduin igitur Aristotulis Alc'xaincni dialogos prius scriptos,
quam Plato suos Socraticos conscripsisset, vocat THQ TrpwrHg ypafavrac TUV

SiaXoywv : sic Divus Lucas, &c. Ilerw. ubi supra, p. 197.
d So Athenoeus says expressly : rwO' tvpe TO ettioc TUV Xoywv.

c TOIVVV <f>a<Ji TTQUTOV ypav//«i T.rjviuvd TOV EXtaTijv' Apt^OTtXrjf de
rjTMV A\t^ap.tv(iv ^Tiipta tj Tr/iov, w£ Kiti Q>aj3<i>pivoc tv
Diog. Laert. lib. iii. Segni. 48.
II TrXjjyj; TrpwTOv TT)£ a<?pa7rr]<; TTJV flpovTrjv (nroTtXfi, rj iifj-a. Ictus prius
tonitru perficit quam fulgur, aut siinul. Alex. Aphrod. Problem. 1. i.

328 Credibility of the Gospel History.

How far the argument will hold by way of analogy from
adverbs to adjectives, I cannot say. It ought also to be
allowed, that the TT^WTOS /tot T* Iu£a of 2 Sam. xix. 43, (but
not found in all copies of the Seventy,) is an equivalent
phrase to that in St. Luke, and to be understood in the sense
put upon St. Luke's words. The passage from the Macca
bees, " Last of all after the sons the mother died," contains
also a parallel phrase. To these I add two other instances £
of 7T/9WT09 itself, which I am unwilling to contest, and shall
leave with the reader.

Perizonius's way of accounting for this construction by
the ellipsis of a preposition to be understood, when not ex
pressed, is well argued from the two instances he has alleged
of Trpo subjoined to TT^WTO?. I add another like instance from
Eusebius:h though perhaps the other way of supposing
Trpwrri used for 7rpoTepa{ need not be quite rejected.

I presume this may be sufficient to show, that the phrase
in St. Luke is capable of the sense contended for by these
learned men. But I cannot yet persuade myself, that it is
the real sense of the text, for the following reasons.

1. This is a very uncommon use of the word TT/JWTO?. This
I think is evident, in that the critics have been so much at
a loss for instances. Stevens knew ofk none, beside that
produced above from Aphrodisius, where vrpw-rov is used
adverbially. There are also almost innumerable other ways
of expressing this priority of time.1 The reason of the
Greek writers so rarely using this word thus is very ob
vious ; it can hardly be done without causing some ambi
guity, therefore when they use it in this sense, we see they
often subjoin Trpo. That this use of Trpwro? was designedly
avoided, seems to me evident, from a passage of Herodotus;
where having in the former branch of the sentence twice used
the superlative, in the latter he takes the comparative ; either

g ITpO TWV OVTb)Q OVTWV, Kttt Tb)V 0\(t)V ap%toV £71 SftOQ £(f, TTQUTOQ Kdl Tti

7rpwr« Sfs /cat /SaffiXtwg. Ante eas res quae vere sunt, et ante principia uni-
versalium, est unus Deus prior etiam primo deo et rege. Jamblich. de Myste-
riis, sect. viii. cap. 2. Kai Trpwrog frf^avsro rwv aXXwv' primus ante alios
corona honoratus est. Dionys. Hal. Hist. Rom. 1. iv. c. 3.

h AvriKct ysv [j.a\a S-fatrw/^Oa, OTTW? fitv 6 ITXarwv TSQ Trpo avrs Trpwrae
£<mo7rr£iv, OTTWC Se TBQ HXaroivoQ dia£o%«£ aXXof Praepar. Evan. 1. xiv.
cap. 2. ' ETI $£ TIQ SvvafUQ, «<rtci£ [nv devrtpa, i^X^f

&• irpwTr]. Est autem quaedam vis essentia quideni inferior, sed nobilior ani-
mo. Sallus. de Mundo, c. 8.

k IIpwTov' TTportpov, prius. Alexander Aphrodisius, r} TrX^yrj, K. X. Quern
alioqui usum apud vetustiores scriptores rarissimum esse puto : affertur tamen
et ex Aristotelis Rhet. Trpwrov n> Pro prius quam. Thesaur. Gr. Tom. iii.
567. A.

1 TTpo, TTponpov, TrpuTov, [adverb] Trportpor, TTpwrjj, ?rpo, ?rpiv, &C.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 329

to avoid ambiguity, or as more agreeable to the genius of
the Greek language."1

2. It does not appear, that any of the first Christians un
derstood St. Luke in this sense. That they did not so inter
pret this text, we are assured from the Syriac, Vulgate,
and other versions ; from Justin Martyr, Eusebius, and from
the passage of Julian above quoted : in which he certainly
represents the common opinion of people in his time, of
Christians and others.

7. There is another solution, which was first proposed by
"Beza, and has been embraced by many learned0 men.
The Roman catholic authors, that approve of this solution,
agree to understand the words as they stand in the Vul
gate version : This first description, or enrolment, was made
by Cyrenius. P The protestants generally render them :
" This first enrolment was made, Cyrenius being president
of Syria: or, when Cyrenius was president of Syria."**

By president of Syria, they do not understand president
in the most strict and proper sense of the word ; it being
apparent from Josephus, that either Saturninus or Quinti-
lius Varus must have been president of Syria at the time
this enrolment was made. And there is no instance of two
persons being jointly presidents with equal power in the
same province, when a province was in peace, as Syria was
at this time/

They suppose, that when Augustus had issued his decree,
that all the world, that is, all the Roman empire, should be
taxed, (for in this wide and extensive sense do these learned
men understand these words of St. Luke,) Cyrenius was
sent with extraordinary power to make the census in Syria
and Judea : and Saturninus, or Quintilius Varus, which
soever of them was then president, was joined with him ;

Ol dt AiyvTTTioi, TTQIV \itv rj "^a/i/ijjnxov <j<peu)v fiaoi\tvaai,

jeveaBai -KCLVT^V avOpwrrwv' eTriidrj Ss ^a/i/tjjri^og (SaffiXevaaQ
etStvai oinvtQ ytvoiaro Trpwroi, O.TTO TSTH vopiZsai 3>pvyag TrportpHc
ftojvTwv, Td)v Sf. a\\(*)v euivrsQ. Herodot. 1. ii. init. The Egyptians, before
the reign of Psamraetichus, thought themselves the first [or most ancient] of
all people. But since the reign of Psammetichus, who made an experiment
for finding out who were the first of all people, they have thought that the
Phrygians were before them, they before others.

n Bez. in loc. Vid. et Huet. Dem. Ev. Prop. ix. cap. 10. sect. 3.

0 Grot, et Hamm. in loc. Scaliger. Animad. in Chron. Euseb. ad A. 2016.
Casaub. in Bar. Exerc. i. Num. xxxi. 32. Usser. Ann. ant. aer. Chris, v. Noris.
Cenot. Pis. Dissert, ii. p. 320—322. Pagi, Ap. ad ann. Bar. Num. 126—129.

P Haec descriptio prima facta est a praeside Syriae Cyrino.

1 Haec descriptio prima facta est, praesidente Syriae Cyrenio. Bez. Haec
descriptio prima facta est, cum praeesset Syriae Cyrenius. Casaub. ubi supra.
Numb. xxxi. r Vid. Noris. Cenotaph. Pis. Diss. ii. c. 16. sect. 10.

330 Credibility of the Gospel History.

and was subordinate to him, or had equal power with him
in this particular work. Cyrenius therefore, having at this
time some power in Syria, he is called president of it, though
he was not properly president, or the ordinary chief magis
trate of that province.

In order to justify this solution, two things are to be
considered : 1. Whether Cyrenius, though not properly
president of Syria, may be called so in a loose and general
sense : 2. It must be shown, that it is not unlikely, that
Cyrenius might be sent upon this affair at this time with
extraordinary power.

As to the first point, it is alleged, that the title of gover
nor or president is often given to others beside those who
are properly possessed of that dignity. Josephus calls
Saturninus and Volumnius presidents of Syria,8 though Sa-
turninus was at that time president, according to his own
account, and Volumnius procurator only ; that is, the
officer that took care of the emperor's revenue in that pro
vince.

That Cyrenius might be sent upon this affair with ex
traordinary power, is not at all unlikely, for the office of
censor in the city was very honourable, and was a distinct
charge from that of the consuls and praetors, the ordinary
magistrates. The surveys in provinces also were often per
formed, not by the ordinary governors, but by persons sent
thither with extraordinary power, and those persons of the
highest eminence and dignity.

Such an one was this Cyrenius. He was not descended
from a noble, or patrician family ; but by his early services
he had obtained the honour of the consulship, and passed
through that and other offices with great reputation ; ob
tained a memorable victory over the Homonadenses, for
which he received the honour of triumphal ornaments : was
afterwards governor to Cains Caesar, Augustus's eldest
adopted son ; married Amelia Lepida, who had been de
signed by Augustus for the wife of Lucius, his second
adopted son ; and at last had the honour of a public
funeral by a decree of the senate in the reign of Tiberius. u

s Eiceivog Se BifXeyero TTspt TSTCJV TOIQ Kaiffapog rjyeftoaiv Sar«pw<£) re KCLI

OvoXa/jivKit Trspi u)v eiri Tf. Sarapvivs KO.I OuoXs/ivis TTIQ Suptae eiri^aTsv-

T(t)v' Ant. lib. xvi. c. 9. p. 734. v. 25, et 37. IIoXXctKig fiev e-rn "Sar&pvivov
fXQovTct Kai OvoXs^iviov THQ TTjs Supiaf ^ye/iovcfg* Ib. c. 10. p. 741. v. i.

1 Regimen summae rei penes Germanicum agendo Galliarum censui turn in-
tentum. Tacit. Ann. 1. i. c. 31. ad A. U. 767. Interea Germanico per Gal-
lias, ut diximus, census accipienti, excessisse Augustum adfertur. Id. cap. 33.
vid. et lib. ii. cap. 6. u Sub idem tempus, ut mors

Sulpicii Quirinii publicis exsequiis frequentaretur, petivit [Tiberius] a senatu.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 331

The quick despatch he made of affairs of importance,
rendered him a very fit man for such an affair as this census
in Syria and Judea.

Moreover there is nothing" in the history that we have of
Cyrenius, which is any way inconsistent with his coming-
into Judea about this time; but divers particulars, which
render it very probable he might be employed in this work.

Cyrenius was consul of Rome, A. U. 742. He might
therefore very well be sent upon the expedition against the
Homonadenses in the year U. C. 747, or possibly, in 746.
It was a piece of prudent advice, which Maecenas gave v
Augustus, never to bestow a provincial government upon
the senators, or other great men, till some time after they
laid down their city magistracy : which advice Augustus
followed, and appointed the space of five years' interval be
tween their serving any public office in the city, and re
ceiving another in the provinces. w

As Cyrenius's expedition against the fore-mentioned
people was his first action after his consulship, he might
very probably be employed in it, A. U. 747. Archbishop
Usherx thinks he was then proconsul of Cilicia. Cardinal
Noris thinks it more likely, that he was not then the ordi
nary governor of Cilicia, but that he was sent upon this
expedition with extraordinary y power. However, the
learned men that embrace this solution suppose, that having1
finished this war, he might be sent into Syria and Judea to
perform the census there, in the latter end of the year of
Rome 747 ; or, as others, in 748, or 749. About which
time the census or enrolment, which St. Luke speaks of,
must have been made; for Herod died in the year 750, or
751.

Cyrenius was not appointed governor to Caius Caesar till
the year TJ. C. 755. Cardinal Noris infers this from the
words of Tacitus above cited ; datus rector Caio Ccesari
Jlrmemam obtinenti. It is evidently a mistake of those

Nihil ad veterem et patriciara Sulpiciorum familiam Quirinius pertinuit, ortus
apud mimic ipium Lanuvium : sed impiger militiae, et acribus ministeriis con-
sulatum sub Divo Augusto ; mox, expugnatis per Ciliciam Homonadensiura
castellis, insignia triumphi adeptus j datusque rector Caio Caesari Armeniam
obtinenti, Tiberium quoque Rhodi agentem coluerat. Tacit. Ann. 1. iii. c. 48.
Quirinio— destinata quondam uxor L. Caesari, ac Divo Augusto nurus, dede-
retur. Id. ibid. c. 23. De hac re vid. etiam Sueton. Tib. c. 49. et de victo
ria in Homonadenses parta, Strabon. 1. xii. p. 854.

T Dio, lib. 52. p. 479. fin. w Mq&j/a Trpo irtvrt truv

fiera TO tv ry TroXet ap£ai KXrjpsodai' Id. 1. liii. p. 505. C. Auctor et aliarum
rerum fuit. In queis — ne magistratus deposito honore statim in provincias
mitterentur. Sueton. Aug. c. 36. x Vid. Ann. A. 5. ante ser.

Chr. y Cenotaph. Pis. Diss. ii. p. 319.

332 Credibility of the Gospel History.

learned men who have thought, that Cyrenius was governor
to Caius, when he first went into the east. It is certain,
that M. Lollius was then his governor. And Cyrenius was
not put into that post, till after the death of Lollius,2 which
seems to have happened some time in the year of Rome 755.
Besides, it is certain from Josephus, that Caius was at Rome
after the death of Herod, and therefore was not yet set out
for the east ; for he was one of those whom Augustus called
to the council he held after Herod's death about confirming
his last will."

Cyrenius therefore seems to have been at leisure for this
work ; and from the whole of his story and character, so
far as it is come down to us from the Greek and Roman
authors, no man appears more likely to have been employed
in it.

This solution has one advantage above most of those
above mentioned, in that it is here allowed, that this survey
was performed by Cyrenius, in which all the ancient Chris
tian writers agree, except Tertullian ; who in one place (but
the only place in which he has named the chief officer con
cerned in it) ascribes it to Saturninus. And we are much
obliged to these learned men, for tracing the history of Cy
renius, and thereby removing, in part at least, the objections
against this supposition, which has been the current opinion
of christians.

There is, however, one difficulty attending this solution ;
I mean the sense in which these learned men understand
Cyrenius's government or presidentship. I do not at all
contest the validity of their argument, that the title of
rj^ef^av may be given to one who is not properly president.
But since Cyrenius certainly was afterwards the ordinary
governor of Syria, it is not easy to understand this title in
St. Luke in a loose and general way : and I can never per
suade myself, that St. Luke intended no more than the
power and authority of making a census in Syria. If Cy
renius had never been president of Syria, perhaps their in
stances had been to the point ; but now I think they are
not. Besides, according to the way in which these learned
men generally interpret St. Luke, faepovevovTov, &c. is here
the genitive case absolute, or governed by GTTI understood :
either of which does as fully express Cyrenius's being pre
sident of Syria, as any form of expression can do.

Joseph Scaliger seems to have interpreted these words
somewhat differently from other learned men, who embrace

z Velleius, 1. ii. c. 102. Suet. Tib. c. 13. Noris. ubi supra, p. 317.
* Joseph. Ant. lib. xvii. cap. 9. p. 775. v. 24.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 333

this solution. He takes them thus : * This description was
' the first under Cyrenius, president of Syria.' I put his
words in the margin, b that the reader may judge whether I
misunderstand him. But still this interpretation is liable to
the objection last mentioned ; for it is implied in it, that
Cyrenius was president of Syria, at the time of both these
surveys.

V. There is yet another interpretation, which these words
are capable of, and which has for some time appeared to me
the genuine meaning of them. " This was the first assess
ment of Cyrenius, governor of Syria." The natural order

of the words is this : AVTTJ e^evero ?j TrpiDTrj a.7ro<ypa(j)r) yv* T. a.

K. There are innumerable instances of a construction paral
lel with this here, of Avrrj ^ airo^pa^ TrpwTrj' Matt. xxii. 38.
AVTVJ eo-Tt Trpiarrj /cat fie^a\rj evTo\r]* " This is the first and great
commandment," Mark xii. 30. Aim; Trpia-r^ ev7o\ijt Numb.
ii. 32. Avrrj €7riffKe\[ri<} TUOV vlwv laparj\' " These are those
which were numbered of the children of Israel." I put an
instance or two more intoc the margin. It is easy for the
reader to observe, these instances are parallel with the words
before us ; the particle 7 or al follows au-ny or aimu, and
precedes tiie substantive.

E<yevero is not here facta est, ' was made,' but fuit, ' was.5
I presume I need not give any proofs that this is a very
common meaning of this verb.

The distant situation of e^evero in St. Luke from aim/,
need not create any scruple. In some examples the verb
substantive is quite wanting, as in Mark xii. 30, Numb. i.
44. Sometimes e<n-ti/ is expressed, and follows immediately
after cum/. But it is found in all kinds of positions in pas
sages parallel with this of St. Luke. I give one instance,
which answers the construction of this verse in every respect,
Rev. xix. 9, OVTOI ol Xofyot aXyOivoi eiari T« 0e»* " These are
the true sayings of God." And another instance fromd
Plato of eyeve-To itself, in a situation exactly parallel with

this in St. Luke. 'H £e r) TeXeux^, w E^e^ores, TS CTCU/JS vjfiiv
av&po<?9 ws 7)^iet? (paipev av, ttav Tore wv eTretpaOrj^ev
, Kai aXXws 0/)oi/t/tWTaT8 /cat ^t/catoraTS. * This, O Eche-

b Ideo S. Lucas non contentus est dicere, Avrrj airoypaQrj syevero ri
OVTOQ TTJQ Suptac Kvprjvis. Sed quum duas cnroypafyctQ sciret fuisse, addidit,
TrpioTij- avri) 17 cnroypaQr) tytvero TrpwrT). Certe, si est Trpwr?/, ergo quaedam
fuit Sevrepa ; et sane rr/g dtvrepae merainit, idem, Act. v. 37. Atque ita
distinguendum esse nemo dubitare potest. Scaliger. Animadv. in Chron. Euseb.
ac* A. 2016. c Numb. i. 44. AVTTJ rj eTTiffKttyie rjv eiriaKt^aTo Nuivar]G.

cap. iii. 1. Kat avrai al ytvtatig Aapwv, v. 2. /cat raura TO. ovo/zara ruv viuv
Aapa>v vid. c. iv. 31, 37. Deut. vi. 1. et alibi. d Phsedo. fin.

334 Credibility of the Gospel History.

6 crates, was the end of our friend ; and, as we say, the best,
' wisest, and justest man that ever we knew.'

If it be objected, that it must be this census, or this first
census was made, and not this was the first census ; because
there is no noun substantive preceding* cum/, by which it can
be governed : I answer, that, as 1 interpret the words, av^
is governed by the aTro^pa^rj that follows, or by an a-n-o^pa^
understood. And this is the case of many other6 passages,
which yet must be construed, as I do St. Luke.

Let us proceed. When St. Luke calls Cyrenius " go
vernor of Syria," I understand the words in the strict and
proper sense. 'H^e/ioj/evo^Tos T^? ^vpias is not the genitive
case absolute, or governed by e-n-i understood, and to be
construed, " Cyrenius being governor of Syria," or " when
Cyrenius was governor of Syria ;" but it is governed by
aTro^pa^rj. They do not express any time at all : but this is
Cyrenius's title, the title by which he was well known in
that part of the world : as we say, Antony the triumvir, or
Cato the censor, to distinguish them from others of the same
names. 'Hrye^oi/evoj/Tos, &c. is with me the same thing, as if
St. Luke had said, 7)76/1,0^0? T^? *2vpia?9 Kiy^i^s.

It is certain, that Greek authors delight very much in the
use of participles ; and I think more especially when they
speak of titles and dignities. Thus Cicero, in fDio, says:
' We expect that our praetors and consuls should follow the
6 laws of reason and justice.' The same historian & says :
6 The three brothers, the Antonies, had all of them some
' office in the city at one and the same time ; Marcus was
' consul, Lucius tribune, and Caius praetor.'

These participles seem to me to be sometimes substan
tives, or at least, to beh used substantively. I believe all
are sensible that ap-^uov is so used. Some of those other
titles of offices or dignities expressed by participles, seem
to me to be very near, or altogether parallel with it.

But let ijiefjLovevovTos be a mere participle ; only then it
will be said, if it be governed by aTro^pa^, it ought to have
been faefiovevffavro?. To this I answer, that undoubtedly

e Ezek. xlviii. v. 1, Kai ravra ra ovofjiara TWV 0v\wv. v. 29, 30, Avrtj
*) yn> ~nv jSaXtire iv K\t]p({) TCIIQ $v\aiQ TS IcrpajjX" Kai OVTOL ot Siafjispiajjioi av
ro)v — Kai avrai ai SiticfidXai TTJQ 7ro\Ea>£.

1 T«f [lev Tjoarjjysvrog T&£ ff vTrartvovrae iravra air opQrjg TIJG SiavoictQ
TTOUIV aiiu)aop.tv' Lib. xliii. p. 250. D.

g T|0£i£ yap ct a$fX0oi 01 AVTMVIOI OVTOL OVTSQ ap^ag a/ia Travrig, (.c^ov* O
fiev yap Map/cog VTraTtvwv 6 fie AaKiog dr)p.ap%(i)V 6 Se Ta'ioQ <rparjjywv. Lib.
xlv. p. 274. C. h AeKtavog Karog 6 TTJQ vrjffs tTTirpOTTtviov' Dio, 1

Ixii. p. 791. A. Ke<r«p TaXXy rip rrjg ZvpictQ ifytfiovtvovTi. Joseph, p. 907
v. 12. AVTOG fo VTTO TB Tijs x^PaS vytHovtvovTog deOfig. Id p. 945. v. 35.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considei'ed. 335

would have been very proper, but so is also
It is no uncommon thing, for Greek authors
to use the present tense for the first aorist. I give an in
stance or two that may fully justify my interpretation.
Josephus says, * And it is certain that Varus was of a royal

* family, since he was a descendant of Soemus, who was te-

* trarch of a country near mount iLibanus.' Kat ^v o/*o-

A, o<y a^eytu? o Qvepos (SaffiKiKti ryevtis* e^yyoyos 2oeyti8 T« Trept A.i(3avov

TeTpap^svro<s. Dionysius says, that the Latins were so called
from Latinus, a king of that country. k If any should say,
it is improper to understand this participle as I do, because
'Cyrenius was not governor of Syria till after the time in
which St. Luke's survey was made, I add one example
more, which must fully obviate this exception. Herodian
says, < That to Marcus the emperor were born several

* daughters1 and tWO SOUS.' Tw Pa<n\evovri MapKW Owyarcpes

jm€v eryej/oi'To TrXetas appevev Be Svo. Yet several of those chil
dren were born to him before he was emperor. This in
stance shows plainly, that these participles do not always
import only the time when men are in office.

I hope this is sufficient to show, that fae/movevovTos is the
same as ^/e^oi/o?, at least that it is governed by mro^pa^rj.
The supposing yrye/movevovTos, T. <r. K. to be the genitive ab
solute, or governed by eTu, as it has given occasion for the
objection we are now upon, so it seems to have carried most
learned men off from the right way of solving it.

I apprehend I have now justified my interpretation of
every part of this verse : " This was the first assessment (or
survey) of Cyrenius, the governor of Syria, or of Cyrenius,
who was governor of Syria."

But if any choose rather to take Scaliger's method as to
the first part of the verse, I shall not contend about that,
provided my sense of the latter part be admitted. Then the
interpretation will stand thus : this survey was the first
[survey] of Cyrenius the governor of Syria.

Nor can I see any reason why all those who follow Beza,
and suppose that this survey was made by Cyrenius, as
well as that made after Archelaus's removal, should not re
ceive this interpretation. When they come to show, why
this is called by St. Luke the first survey, though indeed
they have not translated the place as I do,m they unavoid-

1. yUy. v. 20. k Ovofia & KOIVOV ol ffvfnravTsg OVTOI

Aarivoi eic\r]9r](rav en avdpoQ SvvaaTtvovrog TUV TOTTUV Aarii>«. Antiq. R.
lib. ii. p. 76. v. 24. 1 Lib. i. init.

Denique dicitur haec descriptio Trpwrij, ut distinguatur ab alia, de qua
Act. v. 37. quam Josephus et Eusebius literis consignarunt, et sub Cyrenio

336 Credibility of tJie Gospel History.

ably run into the same meaning. JBaronius11 likewise un
derstands the words much after the same manner, only he
falsely supposed that Cyrenius was twice president of Syria.

Some time after I had been persuaded that this was the
sense of this text, I met with these words of Tanaquil
Faber.0 ' Beatus Lucas, cap. 2. ait natum esse Christum
* Dominum tempore primi census, seu descriptionis, quae a
' Cyrenio seu Quirinio facta est.' This passage gave me a
great deal of pleasure, though it does not appear how this
acute and learned man understood ^e^ovevovro^. — But I
have since met with a more explicit authority for my way
of translating Aim? rj aTroypacfrij. The title of Origen's xith
Homily upon St. Luke, in the Latin edition of his works, is
thus : < De eo quod scripturn est, Puer autem crescebat et
' confortabatur spiritu, usque ad eum locum ubi ait : Hoec
4 est descriptio prima quae facta est sub praeside Syriae
' Cyrino.' And in the body of the homily P are words to the
same effect.

The version I here offer does not only appear to me a
very natural and obvious meaning of the words, but it is
very good sense, and extremely suitable to their position in
a parenthesis. " In those days there went out a decree from
Caesar Augustus, that all the world [[land] should be tax
ed. (This was the first assessment of Cyrenius the gover
nor of Syria.)" It is needless to observe, that if this version
be allowed, the objection we are considering vanishes.
There is no colour or pretence to say, that St. Luke con
founded the census or survey made in the time of Herod,
with that made after the removal of Archelaus.i

etiam factam dicunt, licet diverse tempore. Hamm. in loc. ex versione
Cleric.

Hunc igitur censum Quirinius habuit A. U. 749. cum extraordinario im-
perio in Syriam missus ; quae descriptio prima a S. Luca dicitur, quod idem
postea Quirinius A. U. 760. praeses ordinarius in Syriam veniens, censum ite-
rum in Judaea egit, eadem turn primum in provinciae formam redacta. Noris ,
Cenotaph. Pis. p. 322.

n Quod igitur ab evangelista ea descriptio a Quirino prima facta dicitur, non
sic (ut vidimus) est accipiendum, ut tune primum Judaei fuerint descripti at-
que censi : sed primam dixerit respectu secundae sub eodem praeside factae.
App. Num. 88. ° Epist. lib. i. ep. 43.

P Haec fuit descriptio prima, a praeside Syriae Cyrino.

q Non potest hie census esse, de quo Lucas meminit, quippe tamdiu post
natum Dominum factus. In quo turpiter lapsus est Eusebius, 1. i. Hist. c. 5.
qui eundem fuisse credidit. Nos ab Quirino bis in Judaea censum actum esse
conjicimus, et extraordinarium utrumque, hoc est, praeter ordinarios praesides
Syriae, missum esse cum extraordinaria curatione et potestate Quirinum.
Primus ab illo census institutus est sub ortum Domini, quo tempore Cn.
Sentius Saturninus Syriae praeerat. — Posterior censio, post Archelai relegatio-
nem ab eodem facta Quirino est. Ideo S. Lucas superiorem illam descriptio-

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 337

VI. I apprehend there lies now no objection against St.
Luke, but what may arise from the doubts which some may
have in their minds, concerning Cyrenius being the officer
employed in making this survey. I wish the reader be not
quite tired with this long succession of criticisms ; but
whether he will accompany me any farther or not, I think
myself obliged to take into consideration all the difficulties
which attend this particular circumstance.

Here I adopt at once all that has been already offered by
those who embrace Beza's solution, to make it appear pro
bable, that Cyrenius performed the census of which St.
Luke speaks. But now I enjoy a peculiar advantage above
those learned men, in the supposition I advanced at first,
that this census of Cyrenius was of Judea only. They
think, that Augustus's decree extended to the whole em
pire ; and that Cyrenius was sent with extraordinary power
to make the census in Syria and Judea. But they suppose,
(and indeed they are obliged to allow it,) that Saturninus
was joined with him, if Saturninus was then president.
This has given Perizoniusr a fine advantage against their
supposition, that Cyrenius was concerned in this census.
To give Cyrenius superior or equal power to Saturninus in
Syria, the province of which he was the ordinary governor,
Avould have been an affront; especially considering, that
Saturninus was equal to Cyrenius in every respect, and
superior to him in some: for he was of a better family, and
the elder consul by seven years. And it is no less injurious
to Cyrenius to put him under Saturninus.

I am not at all concerned with this. I think Cyrenius
performed the census alone, by virtue of the extraordinary
power with which he was sent ; but if any are inclined to
think, that Saturninus was joined in the commission with
him, this would be no disparagement to Saturninus. To
give him authority in a neighbouring kingdom, where he
had none before, would not be to lessen him, but to aug
ment his power : nor do I suppose it could be any disgrace
to Cyrenius, to have the governor of Syria made his
partner.

I proceed to consider all the difficulties that can affect
the supposition, that this census was made by Cyrenius, as
far as I am concerned with them.

1. It is said, that it was not customary for the Romans to
send any great man twice into the same country. Since it

nem primam appellat. In qua tributi nihil, aut capitationis, exactum puto,
&c. Petavii Rationarium Temporum. P. 2. lib. iv. cap. 2.

r Dissert, de Aug. Descrip. sect. 15, 16, 17.

VOL. I. Z

338 Credibility of the Gospel History.

is certain from Josephus, that Cyrenius afterwards made a
census in Syria and Judea, it may be concluded, he did not
perform that survey, which St. Luke says was made in Ju
dea at the time of our Saviour's nativity.8

To this I answer: I allow, that it was not usual for the
same person to be more than once made the president of one
and the same province ; and in this, Baronius, who thought
Cyrenius was twice or thrice governor of Syria, is deserted
by all learned men. For none of the defenders of Beza's
solution, who maintain the double census of Cyrenius, do
say, that Cyrenius was twice the ordinary president of
Syria.

But it was very common for one and the same person to
be sent twice or oftener into the same country in different
posts, or with different degrees of authority. Casaubon*
has produced instances enough to silence this objection,
M. Vipsanius Agrippa, the person last mentioned by him,
was sent twice into Syria by Augustus with extraordinary
power : first of all, A. U. 731, u and again, A. U. 738. v

I will give an undeniable example of an officer's being
twice in the same province with different degrees of power.
When Piso, prefect of Syria, had been removed by Ger-
manicus, and after that Germamcus himself died, the
officers in the province had a consultation together, who
should be made president of Syria : Vibius Marsus laid
claim to it, but at last yielded to Cn. Sentius Saturninus,vv
the elder officer. Thus Sentius, one of the chief officers
then in the province, was made president. This alone is a
proof, that it was very common for officers to serve different
posts in the same province. But this is not the only thing*
I aim at. This consultationx was held A. U. 772. A. D. 19.

s Multis de causis displicet nobis gemina haec Cyrenii descriptio. Bis ad
eandem rem Quirinium in Syriam fuisse missum, fidem vix imperat, nee Ro-
manos ad mores quadrat. Basnage.Ann. Pol. Eec. ant. Dom. 5. num. 14.

1 Neque vero nullum est exemplum illorum, qui in easdem provincias cum
eodem vel diverse munere sunt missi. C. Cassius profectus in Syriam quaestor
M. Crassi : mox, ipso et ejus exercitu deleto, res magnas ibi gessit, et aliquam-
diu provinciam obtinuit : eidemque post aliquot annos senatus Syriam et
bellum contra Dolabellam decrevit. Ventidius Bassus quando primum cum
Parthis bellum gessit, Antonii fuit legatus : postea ejusdem belli gerendi cura
illi demandata est, — Agrippa, qui per decennium Asiam administravit, bis ex
Italia eodem est profectus. Casaub. in Baron. Exerc. 1. num. 32.

u Dio, 1. iii. p. 518. c. T Id. lib. liv. p. 534. B.

w Consultatum inde inter legatos, quique alii senatorum aderant, quisnam
Syriae praeficeretur. Et caeteris modice nisis, inter Vibium Mar sum et Cn.
Sentium din quaesitum : dein Marsus seniori, et acrius tendenti Sentio con-
cessit. Tacit. Ann. lib. ii. cap. 74 x M. Silano et

L. Norbano Coss.

Objections acjainst Luke ii. ], 2. considered. 339

and it appears from Josephus, y and Tacitus,2 that long1 after
this, in the reigna of Claudius, this same Vibius Marsus
came to be actually president of Syria. There is therefore
no absurdity at all in supposing", that Cyreiiius was sent by
Augustus with extraordinary power at the latter end of
Herod's reign to make a survey in Judea, and that about
ten or twelve years afterwards he came as the ordinary
governor into Syria, and then made a census in that pro
vince, and in Judea annexed to it.

2. It is objected, that none of the Roman or Greek his
torians, though Cyrenius has been spoken of by several of
them, have taken any notice of this census.

I answer, that this is no difficulty at all. I suppose, that
no one will make any question, but that Cyrenius made an
assessment in Syria and Judea when he was sent president
into Syria, because we have Joseph us's authority for it ; and
yet none of the Roman or Greek authors have said any thing
of that census.

Though Tacitus has in the passage above cited reckoned
up divers of Cyrenius's exploits and honours, and others
have made mention of him, and some of his services, yet
Florusb has taken notice of a considerable action of his
omitted by all the rest : if indeed he means our Cyrenius.

3. But it will be said : It may be certainly concluded from
the account which Josephus has given of the census madec
by Cyrenius after Archelaus's banishment, that Cyrenius
had never been in Judea, or enrolled the Jews before ; if he
had, Josephus could not well have omitted to take notice of
it then.

I own, that at first sight this must appear a very con
siderable difficulty.

(1.) But it ought to be observed, that Josephus does not
particularly name any of Cyrenius's honours or services,
beside those which relate to the city of Rome. Josephus
knew of divers others, but he does not express them : and
among those omitted or referred to in the general only, may
be that of the first survey in Judea.

(2.) I think it is plain, that either Josephus did not care
to give any particular account of that oath taken by the

y Kai HIT 8 TTO\V, lltrpuviov [lev Map(TO£ 8it§e%aTO, KO.I Sitnre Svpiav. Ant.
1. xix. c. 6. sect. 4. z Et reciperare Armeniam, ni

Vibio Marso Syriae legato bellum minitante cohibitus foret. Tacit. Ann. xi.
cap. 10. a About A. U. 795. vid. Pagi. Crit. in Bar.

A. D. 42. n. 8. b Marmaridas atque Garamantas Curinio

subigendos dedit [Augustus]. Potuit et ille redire Marmaricus ; sed modestior
in aestimanda victoria fuit. Florus, lib. iv. c. 12.

c See the account above, p. 307.

z2

340 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Jews to Augustus in the latter end of Herod's reign, or else
that he found but a slight account of it in those memoirs
or histories which he made use of. He had said nothing of
it, had it not been for a most remarkable disturbance in
Herod's court and family, with which it had a connexion.

And any one may perceive, that it is then touched upon
very slightly. Is it not strange, that Josephus should not
name the officer that took the oath for Augustus? No one
can make any doubt, but there was some person of emi
nence deputed by the emperor for that work. As Josephus
did not mention him then, 1 should never expect to find his
name afterwards. And whoever can account for Josephus's
omissions relating to the affair of the oath, may account for
his silence in this passage, though Cyrenius had been once
before in Judea.

(3.) I think, that arguments formed upon the omissions
of historians are of very little weight. There are in Jose
phus other omissions as remarkable as this. I desire to
consider the account he gives, in his War of the Jews, of
the reducing Judea to a province. * Archelaus's country

* being reduced to a province, Coponius, a man of the

* equestrian rank among the Romans, was sent procurator,

* being invested with the power of life and death. In his

* time [e:rt THTS] a certain Galilean, whose name was Judas,
' excited the people to a rebellion ; telling them, That they
' were of a mean spirit, if they could endure to pay tribute
4 to the Romans, and acknowledge mortal men for their
1 lords after God had been their king. This man was the

* head of a distinct sect in nothing liked the rest.' This is
all he says. He does not say there was now any census
made, has not one word of Cyrenius, or his coming into
Judea.

It is true, that Josephus has in two other places in the
War of the Jews e occasionally mentioned Cyrenius, and in
the latter of those places his census also ; but it must be
allowed to be a very great omission, not to do this in the
proper place, in the account of the reduction of Judea to
the state of a province. This might have been reasonably
expected in the History of the War, when this assessment
made by Cyrenius, and the principles broached at that time,
were main foundations of it.

If it be said, that Josephus passed over this affair slightly
in the War, because he intended to write his Antiquities,
and mention it more particularly then : I answer, this is said

d De Bell. lib. ii. cap. 8. sect. 1. e Ibid. cap. 17. sect. 8. et

lib. vii. cap. 8. sect. 1.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 341

without ground : and I might as well say, that Josephus
omitted in his Antiquities the particular account of Cyre-
nius's first assessment, because he intended to write after
ward another book of the history of the Jews, and go over
their affairs once more, as he expressly assures us at the
conclusion of his Antiquities.

Josephus informs us in his Life, written after the War and
the Antiquities, that the Jews had a battle with Gessius
Florus, their last procurator, and killed him, and a good
many of his men ; and that this victory was fatal to them,
forasmuch as this determined them to the war with thef Ro
mans. Is it not strange that Josephus should say nothing
of this in the History of the War, where he has made so
frequent mention of Florus, and ascribed the Jewish uneasi
ness under the Roman government to the cruelties and other
irregularities of this man ? For this instance I am indebted
to s Mr. Le Clerc.

There is another omission appears to me very remarkable.
Pheroras, Herod's youngest brother, is often mentioned
by Josephus. He has particularly informed us, that when
Augustus was in Syria, he gave this Pheroras a tetrarchy,h
at the request of Herod ; and we are informed by Josephus,
of Pheroras's retirement into his tetrarchy, of Herod's visit
ing him there, and of Pheroras's dying1 at home, and of his
being brought afterwards from thence to be buried. But
yet, if I mistake not, he has never once said what this
tetrarchy was, whose it had been before, nor where it lay.
It is true, that whereas in the Antiquities k Josephus says,
Pheroras went to his tetrarchy ; in his War1 he says, he
went to Peraea ; or, as in some copies, Petrsea : but Pereea,
properly so called, could not be this tetrarchy, because
Pereea belonged all along to Herod. But this tetrarchy of
Pheroras was given him by Augustus, and was distinct from
that estate or revenue which had m been settled upon him
by Herod. These particulars may convince us, that though
Cyrenius was in Judea in the time of Herod, Josephus was
capable of omitting to take notice of it.

4. Again, it will be said : It may be fairly concluded

O $' £7rt\0(j)v Kai ffvfj,j3a\u)v pax1!' tvucrjOr), TroXXoiv TUV fitr avrs TTEGOV-
Td)v' Kai yivtrai TO Teams TTTuiff/jia, ffvfji(f>opa TS TTCIVTOQ rjfji<jt}V tQvsQ tTrrjpOrjffctv
yap 67Ti rary fj,a\\ov ot rov TroXt/iov ayamjaavTiG, K(*1 viKrjffavrec; rac'Pwjuatag
sis reXog rjX-rncrantv' in Vit. sect. 6. e Hist. Eccl. A. D. 66. n. 12,

h Ant. 1. xv. c. 10. sect. 3. ! Ibid. 1. xvii. c. 3. de B. J. 1. i. c. 29.

7Ti rr\Q avr» TtrpapxictQ' p. 756. v. 37. ' <J>fpwpae de

rr]v Utpatav, p. 1031 . v. 41. vid. et p. 1032. v. 26.
0rt(j $£pcopp irapa KaiaapoQ yrrjcraro rerpap%iav, O.VTOQ cnrovei-
fias £K TIJQ fiaatXtiag Trpoaodov ftcarov raXavra>j>, K. X. Ant. 1. XV. c. 10. sect. 3.

342 Credibility of the Gospel History.

from another place in Josephus, that Cyrenius was but
once in Judea. For he says, that ' Massada was then held
' by Eleazar, the chief man of the sicarii, a descendant of
' Judas, who persuaded not a few of the Jews not to enrol
' themselves, as I have saida above, when Cyrenius the cen-
4 sor° was sent into Judea.'

I own this is a difficulty, but the argument is not con
clusive. It is true, that Judas made this disturbance when
" Cyrenius was sent into Judea," or in the time of Cyrenius ;
but it does not follow, that Cyrenius was sent but once
into Judea. The New Testament will afford us an instance
upon this very subject, which will be of use to us. Gama
liel says, Acts v. 37, " After this man, rose up Judas of
Galilee, in the days of the taxing, and drew away much
people after him." If we had in our hands this book only
of St. Luke, namely, the Acts of the Apostles, it is not un
likely, that many would have supposed, that St. Luke knew
of no other taxing made in Judea, but that in the time of
which Judas rose up. But we are assured from his gospel,
that this conclusion would have been false : for there he
has spoke very particularly of another, which he calls the
first, or at least distinguishes very plainly from some other.

I must be allowed to repeat here once more, that argu
ments formed upon the silence of writers are very seldom
of much moment. Josephus is the only Jewish writer of
those times in whom we have the history of that country ;
and it cannot be justly concluded, that any particular thing
was not done, or that such or such circumstance did not
attend it, because he has not mentioned it. All writers
have their particular views, and some things we are very
desirous to know, might, for some reason or other which we
are ignorant of, lie without the compass of their designs.
Besides, the most accurate and careful historians have omit
ted many facts or incidents, that might be very properly
mentioned, through forgetfulness or oversight. I take the
omission of the description of the tetrarchy that belonged to
Pheroras, to be a remarkable instance of this sort.

5. But it will be said, that Tertullian is positive, the cen
sus in Judea at the time of our Saviour's birth was made by
Sentius Saturninus.P

n Vid. de Bell. 1. ii. c. 17. sect. 8. ° KaX«rat Se TO fjisv

^pspiov Ma<rac>a, TrpoaTTjm de ruv KaraX^orwv avro (Ti/captwv SvvaTog avrjp
E\£a£apo£, aTroyovof Isda TS TTtiaavro^ I«$aia>v «*c oXtyag, wq Trporspov

fir) TTOieiaOai rae cnroypaQaG, or£ Kup^viog rijmjrrjf tig TIJV Isdatav
deB. 1. vii. c. 2. sect. 1. P Sed et census constat

actos sub Augusto nunc in Judsea per Sentium Saturninum. Apud quos ge
nus ejus inquirere potuissent, Cont. Marc. lib. iv. cap. 19.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 343

I answer to this : (1.) It ought to be considered, that the
heretic Marcion, with whom TertuIIian disputes in this place,
did not admit the authority of the first chapter^ of St.
Luke's gospel. And it was the custom of TertuIIian, to ar
gue from those parts of scripture which the heretics he was
dealing withr acknowledged. Possibly therefore TertuIIian
having-, or supposing he had, reason to think, that this cen
sus was made when Saturninus was president of Syria, he
might choose to mention the ordinary officer as a thing cer
tain ; but yet might not intend to affirm, that the census
was made by him, but only that it happened in his time.
Isaac Casaubon judged it not unreasonable so to understand
TertuIIian, who often uses8 words improperly. I thought
it not fit to deprive the reader of this answer of that learned
man : but I do not adopt his interpretation of TertuIIian.

(2.) Tertullian's authority ought not to outweigh the
testimony of more ancient writers, who were nearer the
event. Justin Martyr, in his first apology, presented to the
Roman emperor sixty years before TertuIIian wrote his
books against Marcion, says, this census was performed in
Judea by Cyrenius ; and all other writers agree with Justin,
as has been shown already.

(3.) Tertullian's authority is of the less weight in this
point, because he has made very gross blunders in history,
of which I shall say somewhat more in the third chapter.

4. I imagine some account may be given of this mistake
of TertuIIian. It has been observed, that Marcion, whom
TertuIIian was now argniing writh, did not own the first
chapters of St. Luke's gospel. TertuIIian therefore not
having his eye particularly on St. Luke, and supposing that
this census was made in Judea when Saturninus was pre
sident of Syria, says, it was made by him.

Judea having been afterwards a branch of the province
of Syria, he concluded it was so at this time, and that there
fore the census must have been made by the president of
Syria : but this was arguing from later to more early times,
as men not thoroughly versed in history are apt to do.

q Accedit his Cerdon quidam.— Solum evangelium Lucae, nee tamen totum
recioit. Post hunc discipulus ipsius emersit Marcion. — Haeresin Cerdonis ap-
probare conatus est. De praescrip. Haeret. c. 51.

r Quam et argumentationibus earum, et scripturis quibus utuntur, provoca-
vimus ex abundanti. De Carne Christi, cap. 25.

s Tertullianus, cum ad versus Marcio scribit, Sed et constat, — ad majorem
fidem magistratum ordinarium potius nominat, quam extraordinarium. Ait
autem per Sentium Saturninum dure et Tertullianice, hoc est, improprie pro
£7ri Sfims 2ar8pvii>8, vel ^t/jiovtvovTOQ TTIQ 2. K. Casaub. Exercit. 1,
n. 31.

344 Credibility of the Gospel History.

After the banishment of Archelaus Judea was annexed
to Syria ; but whilst Herod was living*, the president of
Syria had not any proper authority in Judea. The presi
dent of Syria was always the most considerable officer in
the eastern part of the empire. When the Romans had any
war1 in that part of the world, the neighbouring kings were
obliged to follow his directions; to furnish those sums of
money, or those troops, which he required, and to send these
to the places he appointed. When any differences hap
pened between these kings and tetrarchs, they were bound
to refer them to him, nor could they march any forces out
of their territories without his consent : but he seems not,
especially in a time of peace, to have had any proper au
thority within their dominions.

Nor do I think 1 here impute to Tertullian any very gross
mistake. The state of dependent kingdoms and provinces
in the Roman empire underwent frequent changes, and a
person had need to have made history his peculiar study,
and to have aimed at some uncommon accuracy, in order to
understand the state of the Roman provinces for a couple
of centuries.

I have now gone through all the difficulties which are of
any moment in this point.

I have nothing farther to add to those evidences, which I
have already produced, except these two observations : 1st,
That it seems to me highly probable, from the manner in
which Eusebius speaks of this matter in his Chronicle, that
it was originally the common opinion of Christians, that
Cyrenius was sent into Judea on purpose to make this cen
sus ; * In the thirty-third year of Herod, Cyrenius being
' sent by the Roman senate, made a census (or enrolments)
* of goods and persons.'" This does very much confirm
the opinion of those learned men, who think that Cyrenius
was sent with extraordinary power: though why Eusebius
mentions the senate instead of the emperor I know not.

Possibly some may be disposed to set aside Eusebius's
authority, because in his Ecclesiastical History he has con
founded the two surveys. But I must confess I ascribe that,
not to ignorance, but to somewhat a great deal worse. It
is impossible, that a man of Eusebius's acuteness, who had
the New Testament and Josephus before him, should think

1 Turn intellect© barbarorum irrisu, qui peterent quod eripuerant, consuluit
inter primores civitatis Nero, bellum anceps an pax inhonesta placeret, nee
dubilatum de hello — scribitur tetrarchis ac regibus praefectisque ac procuratori-
bus,— jussis Corbulonis obsequi. Tacit. Ann. lib. xv. cap. 25.

u Chron. p. 76.

Objections against Luke ii. 1, 2. considered. 345

a census made after Archelaus's banishment was the same
with that made before Herod died ; but Eusebius was re
solved to have St. Luke's history confirmed by the express
testimony of the Jewish historian, right or wrong, Here
Eusebius was under a bias. In his Chronicle we have a
simple unbiassed account of what was the opinion of chris-
tians, and others, at that time.

Secondly, It seems to me in the nature of the thing- most
probable, that some person was sent with extraordinary
power to make this enrolment. There is no evidence in
Josephus, that Augustus had any intention to take away the
kingdom from Herod, and make Judea a province. A cen
sus in his dominions was a very great disgrace : but to
have ordered it to be performed by the president of Syria,
would have been an additional affront; it would have
looked like making Herod subject to Syria. Since Judea
was to continue a distinct kingdom as hitherto, and only to
be reduced to a more strict dependence, the only method of
making this census could be that of sending* some person of
honour and dignity, like Cyrenius, to enrol the subjects of
Herod, and value their estates; that, for the future, tribute
might be paid according to this census. And this does ad
mirably suit the nature of the oath mentioned in Josephus,
the substance of which was, to be faithful to Coesar and
Herod.

I conclude therefore, that it is upon the whole most pro
bable, that the first assessment, of which St. Luke here
writes, was performed by Cyrenius, as well as the second.
This appears to me a very natural meaning of St. Luke's
words, and the external evidences for this supposition seem
to me to outweigh the objections.

We have now got through the affair of the census. If I
have not been so happy as to remove every difficulty at
tending this text of St. Luke, yet I hope the reader will
allow, at least, that I have not concealed or dissembled any.

346 Credibility of the Gospel History.

CHAP. II.

TWO OBJECTIONS TAKEN FROM THE SILENCE OF JOSEPHUS.

I. He has not mentioned the slaughter of the infants of
Bethlehem : II. Nor of the Galileans, whose blood Pi
late had mingled with their sacrifices.

ST. MATTHEW says, chap. ii. 16, « Then Herod, when he
saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceedingly
wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were
in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years
old and under, according to the time which he had dili
gently inquired of the wise men."

It is objected to this, that if there had been so cruel a
slaughter made by Herod, of innocent infants at Bethlehem,
a place not far from Jerusalem, it is very unlikely it should
have been omitted by Josephus, who has written the his
tory of the Jews, and particularly of the reign of Herod.

To this I answer : 1. This appears to me to be at the best
an objection of a very extraordinary nature. The most
exact and diligent historians have omitted many events
that happened within the compass of those times of which
they undertook to write : nor does the reputation which any
one historian has for exactness, invalidate the credit of an
other, who seems to be well informed of the facts he relates.
Suetonius, Tacitus, and Dio Cassius, have all three written
of the reign of Tiberius : but it is no objection against the
veracity of any one of them, that he has mentioned some
things of that emperor, which have been omitted by the rest.
No more is it any objection against St. Matthew, that he
has related an action of Herod not mentioned by Josephus.

2. There have been as great cruelties committed by many
eastern princes; nor was there ever any man more likely
than Herod to give the orders here mentioned by St. Mat
thew. When he had gained possession of Jerusalem51 by
the assistance of the Romans, and his rival Antigonus was
taken prisoner, and in the hands of the Roman general
Sosius, and by him carried to Mark Antony, Herod by a
large sum of money persuaded Antony to put him to death,
Herod's great fear was, that Antigonus might some time
a Joseph. Antiq. lib. xiv. cap, 16. sect. ult.

Some Omissions of Josephus considered. 347

revive his pretensions, as being1 of the Asmonean family.
Aristobulus, brother of his wife Mariamne, was murdered6
by his directions at eighteen years of age, because the peo
ple at Jerusalem had shown some affection for his person.
In the seventh year of his reign from the death of Antigo-
nus, he put to death Hyrcanus, grandfather of Mariamne,
then eighty years of age, and who had saved Herod's life
when he was prosecuted by the sanhedrim ; a man, who in
his youth and in the vigour of his life, and in all the revo
lutions of his fortune, had shown a mild and peaceable dis
position.0 His beloved wife, the beautiful and virtuous
Mariamne, had a public execution, d and her mother Alex
andra was put to death soon after.6 Alexander and Aris
tobulus, his two sons by Mariamne, were strangled in prison
by his order/ upon groundless suspicions, as it seems, when
they were at man's estate, were married, and had children.
I say nothing of the death of his eldest son Antipater : if
Josephus's character of him be just, he was a miscreant,
and deserved the worst death that could be inflicted.

In his last sickness, a little before he died, he sent orders
throughout Judea, requiring the presence of all the chief
men of the nation at Jericho. His orders were obeyed, for
they were enforced with no less penalty than that of death.
When these men were come to Jericho, he had them all
shut up in the Circus, and calling for his sister Salome, and
her husband Alexas, he told them, ' My life is now but

* short: I know the dispositions of the Jewish people, and
6 nothing will please them more than my death. You have^

* these men in your custody ; as soon as my breath is out
' of my body, and before my death can be known, do you
' let in the soldiers upon them and kill them. All Judea
' and every family will then, though unwillingly, mourn at
6 my death.' Nay, Josephus says, ' That with tears in his
' eyes he conjured them, by their love to him, and their
' fidelity to God, not to fail of doing him this honour ; and
' they promised11 they would not fail.'

These orders indeed were not executed ; but, as a modern
historian of very good sense observes, * The i history of this

b Antiq. 1. xv. c. 3. sect. 3. De Bell. 1. i. c. 22. c Ant. 1. xv. c.

6. de Bell, ubi supra. d Ant. xv. c. 7. sect. 5, 6. e Ibid. sect. 8.

f Ant. Ixvi. c. 1 1. sect. 6. De Bell. 1. i. c. 27. * Toug fo TOVQ ^PHOS^VSQ

avdpctQ tTTtiSav SKirvevaa), ra\i~a KTtivarf. TTtpiTtjaavTeQ TOVQ <rparto»ra£, iva
a. lovdaia icai TTUQ OIKOQ CIKWV sir' e/ioi daicpvrry. De Bell. L i. c. 33. sect. 6.
Kai 6 jit£j/ juera daKpvwv Trorviuj/JitvoQ, (cat ry ffvyytvsg TTJV ivvoiav nai

V 78 9«18 TrpOCHCaXwy, tTTeffKTJTTTE fiT] ^TtfJlMffOai a%l(*JV' K(f.Kf.lVOl MfioXoyOVV

« 7rapa/3/j<Te<T0ai. Ant. lib. xvii. cap. 6. sect. 5. ' Prideaux,

Conn. Part. ii. p. 655.

348 Credibility of the Gospel History.

' his most wicked design, takes off all objection against the
' truth of murdering the innocents, which may be made

* from the incredibility of so barbarous and horrid an act.

* For this thoroughly shows, that there can nothing be
' imagined so cruel, barbarous and horrid, which this man

* was not capable of doing.'

It may be also proper to observe, that almost all the exe
cutions, which I have instanced in, were sacrifices to his
state-jealousy and love of empire. And the slaughter,
which St. Matthew has given an account of, was made upon
the occasion of tidings brought to Jerusalem, of the birth
of one who was " King of the Jews."

3. Joseph us has given us an account of a terrible execu
tion made in Herod's court, and at Jerusalem, about this
very time, upon the occasion of some predictions, that God
was about to take away the kingdom from Herod. 1 think
it was made at the very same time with the slaughter of the
infants. St. Matthew relates only what was done at Beth
lehem, Josephus what happened at Jerusalem. The silence
of Josephus about the former, and of St. Matthew about the
latter, may be in a good measure accounted for by these two
or three considerations.

(1.) St. Matthew was not concerned to relate state mat
ters, but barely to give the history of Jesus Christ; and
therefore all that he was obliged to take notice of upon this
occasion, was the attempts made upon the life of Jesus.
Joseph us's is a political history of the Jewish nation, and
therefore the executions at court might be more suitable to
his design.

(2.) All writers of good sense and candour, who have
written the history of such jealous and cruel princes as
Herod, have been obliged, both out of a regard to them
selves and their readers, to omit some of their odious and
offensive actions, and to pass by some parts or circum
stances of those transactions which they mention. k And I
cannot help paying a particular respect to the evangelists
for the many instances of their candour and goodness, and
for this in particular, that none of them strove to brand the
memory of Herod, who sought the life of Jesus, with the
many cruelties of his reign, or the dreadful circumstances
of his death ; and that Matthew, who alone has informed
us of the murder of the infants, confined his narration to

k Nf que sum ignarus, a plerisque scriptoribus omissa multorum pericula et
paenas, dum copia fatiscunt, aut quae ipsis nimia et moesta fuerapt, ne pari
taedio lectures adficerent, verentur. Tacit. An. 1. vi. c. 7.

Some Omissions of Josephus considered. 349

that, and passed by all the other tokens, which, I doubt not,
Herod showed at this time, of a most odious jealousy.

Nor would I blame Josephus barely for the omission of
the barbarities committed at Bethlehem. He has related
many cruel actions of Herod : to have related them all
would probably have appeared spite and ill will, rather
than faithfulness or impartiality. It is evident, there were
many put to death at Jerusalem, beside those he nameth in
the account of that execution. Possibly, the omission of
the murder of the infants may be owing to those reasons I
have here hinted, namely, a fear of being charged with a
design to load Herod unreasonably, or a fear of rendering
his history disagreeable, by too particular a detail of cruet
actions.

(3.) I have thus far endeavoured to account for Jose-
phus's silence in the way of apology for him, and should
be glad to leave the matter here : but his strange way of
speaking, and that in two1 places of his works, of an exe
cution at Jerusalem about this time, though according to
his own account and acknowledgment it was very severe
and terrible, will not permit me to conclude here. Sup
posing, then, that execution to have been made on account
of discourses, which happened at Jerusalem upon the ru
mour of the birth of Jesus, I think, that since Josephus was
determined in the main to vindicate Herod upon that occa
sion, he was obliged, for his own honour, to say nothing of
what was done at Bethlehem. The slaughter of the infants,
from two years old and under, of a whole city, town, or
village, and the district round about it, whatever colours
an historian might have put upon it, would have appeared
to all mankind, but prejudiced and hardened Jews, an hor
rid inhumanity.

In a word, the objection against this relation of St. Mat
thew must be founded on the silence of the Greek and
Roman historians, or of Josephus. As for the silence of the
former; the Roman republic or empire about this time was
so vast, that the affairs of many dependent princes have
been lost in the crowd. Tacitus goes over the history of
the Jews, from Pompey's conquest of Judea to the govern
ment of Felix, mentioned in the Acts, in one short chapter.

1 One of those passages with observations upon it may be seen above, p.
292, 293. It is the passage I referred to, p. 140, &c. as deserving a particular
attention. If the reader has not yet observed it, I would now recommend it to
his perusal. The other passage will be found toward the latter end of sect. 1.
of the next chapter to this. See in the index * Josephus, his account of a
* terrible execution at Jerusalem.'

350 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Of Herod he says, * The kingdom he received from Antony
4 was enlarged [or confirmed] by Augustus. And that
' after his death, his kingdom was divided between three of
' his sons ;'m without so much as naming the sons of Herod,
who arrived at sovereign power, and succeeded their father.
Strabo says, * Herod obtained the title of king first from

* Antony, and then from Augustus. Some of his sons he
' put to death, as guilty of designs against himself: others
' he appointed his successors, dividing his kingdom among
6 them. But his sons were not happy, for they fell under
' some accusations : one of them was banished into Gaul,
' and the other two, by means of a great deal of submission,

* with much difficulty kept their several tetrarchies.'n He
does not so much as name those sons whom Herod killed,
nor those that succeeded him. It is with a like brevity,
that some other writers have mentioned Herod. Dio Cas-
sius's history of affairs about the latter part of Herod's
reign is wanting. I leave it to any one to judge, whether
it be reasonable to expect the particular fact at Bethlehem
from historians, who plainly content themselves with de
livering the successions of princes, without relating their
affairs, or so much as recording all their names.

As for Josephus, his silence is no more an objection
against St. Matthew, than the silence of other writers is
against him. Josephus has said a great deal of Herod's
liberality to foreigners, to Antioch, Berytus, Tyrus, Sidon,
Damascus, and many other cities in Syria ; to the Athenians,
Lacedaemonians, Rhodians, and other people of Greece. Of
his benefaction to the Eleans, he says, ' It was a common
4 benefit not to Greece only but to all the world :° and that

* he was so remarkable for his liberality, that Augustus and
6 Agrippa often said, Herod's kingdom was too small for

* him, arid that he deserved to be king of all Syria and
' Egypt.' P I suppose people to take these things upon

m Regnum ab Antonio Herodi datum, victor Augustus auxit [al. sanxit].
Post mortem Herodis, nihil expectato Caesare, Simon quidam regium nomen
invaserat. Is a Quintilio Varo obtinente Syriam punitus. Et gentem coerci-
tam liberi Herodis tripartite rexere. Tacit. Hist. 1. v. c. 9.

n 'Hpujdrjg — wore Krai (3aai\evQ £XPrlfJiaTlffe> $OVTOG T0 ^v "xpurov A
rr\v eZaGiav, txrtpov dt fcai Kaioapog 78 Ze/3a<r8* TOJV dt viuv TSQ fitv
avftXtv, aJ£ eTn^aXevaavraQ avn^' Tag Be TtXevruv £iacfo%sc cnrfXnrs,

O.VTOIQ ttTToSsQ' — 8 fJltV TOl £VTVX^aV 01 TTCLlfitQ, a\X' tV aiTldlQ tytVOVTO' Kdl 6

pev sv tyvyy SieTe\eae, ?rapa Toig A\\o/3po£i TaXarat^ Xa/3wv oiicrjcnv' ol dt Srepa-
7TH£ TroXX^ fjioXic tvpovro KaQodov, rtT^)apxtaS ct7roSo6eL(jt]Q fKartp^i. Strabo. 1.
xvi. p. 765. ed. Casaub. ° Antiq. 1. xvi. c. 5. sect.

3, 4. De Bell. 1. i. cap. 21. sect. 11, 12. To Se HXeiot^ \apivQtv, s \aovov
KOIVOV Tijg 'EXXa^oe, aXX' 6Xr]Q rr\c, oiK&p.Evr)£ dwpov. Ibid. sect. 12.

p Kai Qaaiv avrov rs. Kaiaapa KO.I A.ypnnrav 7roXXa/ct(j£t7T£tv, wg a?ro^£ot TO.

Some Omissions of Josephus considered. 35 1

Josephus's authority. I cannot conceive, how the single
silence of Josephus (and of Justus of Tiberias, if you please
to add him) should be an objection against St. Matthew,
when the silence of the Greeks and Syrians, people that
abounded so much in writers, (several of which are also
still in being,) is no objection against Josephus; who has
recorded many things done by Herod for those people, of
which they have made no mention, that we know of.

It has been pretended, indeed, that Josephus was a great
enemy to Herod, and seems willing to tell all his various
acts of cruelty. But this is not certain. For Herod's cha
racter in Josephus has a mixture of good and bad : he has
related a great many things to his advantage, which can be
verified by no other writers. Herod put to death every
member of the Jewish great council in Hyrcanus's time,
except Hillel and Shammai : yet Josephus mentions this
very slightly :i he even takes part with Herod against the
pharisees in an account of an execution made at Jerusalem
in the latter part of his reign. Though Josephus were an
enemy to Herod, he might have inducements to show him
favour upon some occasions : Agrippa the younger was
living, when Josephus wrote, and he had some acquaintance
with him, and obligations to him :r it was not for the ho
nour of the Jewish nation, to make a mere monster of Herod,
who had reigned over them between thirty and forty years.
A particular recital of all Herod's cruelties could not but
make the uneasiness of the Jewish people under the Roman
government appear very unreasonable : they might be
thought a strange people, who rebelled against the Romans,
arid yet had borne with a man who had spared neither young
nor old ; who had slaughtered all the members of their great
council, and the innocent infants of a whole town and all its
district. I have sometimes thought, that this was really
one reason, why Josephus made so slight mention of the
cutting off the members of that senate : it might also be
some inducement not to relate the slaughter of the infants.

But Josephus, as a firm Jew, had certainly a particular
reason for passing over this event at Bethlehem : he could
not mention it, without giving the Christian cause a great
advantage. To write, that Herod, at the latter end of his
reign, had put to death all the young children at Bethle
hem, on occasion of a report spread at Jerusalem, that the
king of the Jews had been newly born there, would have

rrjg ap^r/Q Hpuy ri]q &GKIQ iv avrip jUEyaXo^/v^iac- A£tov yap tivai KO.I
Supiag airaarjG Kai AtyuTrrs TTJV [BaaiXiiav f%£iv. Ant. 1. xvi. c. 5. sect. 1.
q Ant. 1. xiv. c. 9. sect. 4. 1. xv. 1. r Joseph. Vit. sect. 65.

352 Credibility of the Gospel History.

g-reatly gratified the Christians ; since it was well known,
when he wrote, that about thirty years after the death of
Herod, Jesus, being' then about thirty years of age, had been
styled the king of the Jews, and had been publicly cruci
fied at Jerusalem with that title; and it was firmly believed
by all his followers, that he was the great person spoken of
under that character, and was now advanced to dominion
and power.

Nay, I do not see how any serious and attentive heathen,
who had heard any thing of Jesus, could read a relation of
this event in Josephus, a Jewish historian, known to be no
favourer of those called Christians, but he must be disposed
to think, the Christian belief deserved some consideration.
For if there was a report spread at Jerusalem, the capital
city of Judea, that the king* of the Jews had been newly
born ; and if this report was so far credited, that Herod,
notwithstanding his numerous issue, thought it needful to
make away with all the young children at Bethlehem and
its borders, in order to secure the succession in his own
family : this is at once a strong argument, that the Jewish
expectation of a great person to arise from among them is
no new thing, and that there were some reasons to think,
that great person had been born at that time. Moreover,
he must also suppose it possible, that the child, whose life
was aimed at, escaped, notwithstanding the care of Herod :
for it is plain he did not certainly know the child, of whom
the discourse was; if he had, he would not have given
orders for destroying all the young children under such an
age.

The more any heathen knew of the Jewish expectations,
or of the story of Jesus, either by hearsay from the chris-
tians, or by having looked into any of the gospels, the more
would he have remarked such a relation in this historian.

For this reason, Josephus could by no means be willing*
to relate this event, with its most peculiar circumstances;
though I think he has given a general account of Herod's
cruelty at that time, as 1 have sufficiently shown already.

4. St. Matthew's account is confirmed by the testimony
of ancient Christian authors. I give one passage from Justin
Martyr, who wrote before the middle of the second century.
But,' says he, * Herod, when the Arabian wise men did
not come back to him as he had desired them, but ac
cording to a command given them returned by another
way into their own country ; and when Joseph, together
with Mary and the young child, were gone into Egypt,
according to directions given to them also by a divine

Some Omissions of Josephus considered. 353

* revelation ; not knowing the child whom the wise men had
' come to worship, commanded all the children in Bethle-

* hern, without exception, to be killed.'8 This was prophe
sied of by Jeremiah, the spirit of God saying by him thus,
" A voice was heard in Rama." —

This event is also mentioned by1 Irenseus, who lived in
the same century, and by Origenu in the third century, in
his answer to Celsus, where he says, * Herod put to death
' all the little children in Bethlehem and its borders, with a
' design to destroy the king of the Jews, who had been born
' there.' It is needless to make any more quotations of
Christian v writers.

There is also a noted passage in Macrobius, a heathen
author, who flourished in the latter end of the fourth cen
tury, who among other jests of Augustus has this; « When

* he [Augustus] had heard that among the children within
' two years of age, which Herod king of the Jews com-

* manded to be slain in Syria, his own son had been killed,

* he said, " It is better to be Herod's hog than his son."'w

I lay little or no stress upon this passage, partly because
it comes too late, partly because there is reason to suppose,
Macrobius has been mistaken about the occasion of the jest.
No early Christian writers have said any thing of Herod's
having had a young child of his own killed in the slaughter
at Bethlehem. If Augustus did pass this jest upon Herod,
it might be occasioned by the death of Antipater, or rather
of Alexander and Aristobulus.*

This is what I said of this passage in the first edition. I
would now add ; it ought to be allowed, that Augustus did
pass this jest upon Herod, upon some occasion or olher, and
that Macrobius has given us exactly the words of the jest.
This passage also shows, that Herod's slaughter of the in-

s UavTag O.TT\CJQ rag TratSag Tag tv B^QXw/i uuXsvatv avaipiQrjvai. Dialog.
Part. ii. p. 304. Paris, (p. 307. Thirlb.)

1 Propter hoc et pueros eripiebat, qui erant in domo David, bene sortiti in
illo tempore nasci, ut eos praemitteret in suum regnum j ipse infans cum esset,
infantes hominum martyres parans, propter Christum, qui in Bethlehem natus
est Judae, in civitate David, interfectos secundum scripturas. Contra Haer. lib.
iii. c. 16. sect. 4. al. c. 17. In qua [^Egypto]et Dominus noster servatus est,
effugiens earn persecutionem quae erat ab Herode. Ib. c. 21. sect. 3. al. c. 28.

u 'O 5' 'HpoiSqg avsiXe iravTO. ra tv BrjQXeen KO.I roig opioig ctVTrjg TratBia, wg
ovvavaiprjauv TOP ytwrjOevTa I&tiaiwv f3ctffi\ta. Lib. i. p. 47.

v Vid. Euseb. Hist. EC. 1. i. c. 8. P. Oros. 1. vii. c. 3, &c. &c.

w Cum audisset inter pueros, quos in Syria Herodes rex Judaeorum intra
bimatum jussit iriterfici, filium quoque ejus occisum j ait, Melius est Herodis
porcum esse quam filium. Macrob. Sat. lib. ii. cap. 4.

x See Whitby's Annot. on Matt. ii. 16, 17.
VOL. I. 2 A

354 Credibility of the Gospel History.

fants in Judea was a thing well known in Macrobius's time,
and was not contested by heathens.

If we could be assured, that Macrobius transcribed this
whole passage, not only the jest itself, but the occasion of it
likewise, from some more ancient author, it would be a
proof, that this event was well known in that author's time
also. And we should have a great deal of reason to sup
pose that author was a heathen, because it is most likely
that Macrobius, a bigoted heathen himself, y did not much
deal in Christian writers.

But it is possible, that Macrobius found only the jest in
his author, and added the occasion, having collected it from
the common discourse of the christians of his time, who
frequently spoke of this cruel action of Herod. There is
some reason to suspect this, because it is very likely, that
Augustus's reflection upon Herod was occasioned by the
death of one of those sons whom Josephus has mentioned ;
and that it has no relation at all to the slaughter of the
infants at Bethlehem. This suspicion may be farther
strengthened by the great agreement of Macrobius with
St. Matthew, in the words he uses concerning the children.2
Macrobius being ignorant of Herod's story, and having
heard of the slaughter of the infants, when he met with this
jest in some author, concluded there had been some young
child of Herod put to death together with them.

I am content therefore to leave it a doubtful point, whe
ther Macrobius transcribed this whole passage, or the jest
only, from some more ancient author.

Upon the whole then, there lies no objection against this
relation of St. Matthew : there is nothing improbable in the
thing itself, considering the jealous, cruel temper of Herod.
The silence of Josephus, or of the ancient Greek and Roman
historians, can be no difficulty with any reasonable person.
This fact is confirmed by the express testimony of very
early Christian writers, and by Macrobius, a heathen author,
in the latter end of the fourth century ; from whom it ap
pears, that this event was not then contested, and that it was
even better known, than the fate of those sons of Herod,
whom Josephus says he put to death at man's estate.

II. An objection of the like sort with that we have been
considering, may be made against St. Luke, who says, ch.

y This is very evident from his works : and the reader may see a full proof
of it in the Rev. Mr. Masson's Slaughter of the Children in Bethlehem, as an
historical Fact, vindicated, sect. 3.

z Children within two years of age, which Herod king of the Jews com
manded to be slain.

.Some Omissions of Josephus considered. 355

xiii. 1, " There were present at that season, some that told
him of the Galileans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with
their sacrifices." It has been thought strange by some, that
Josephus has made no mention of this event.

In answer to this objection, I shall transcribe a passage
of Josephus. * Judas the Galilean introduced a fourth sect

* among the Jews. In all other things they agree with the

* pharisees, but they have an invincible love of liberty, and

* acknowledge God alone their lord and governor : nor can

* any kind of death, or any punishments of their friends and

* relations, make them call any man lord. As many have
' been witnesses of their immoveable firmness, I shall say no
' more upon this head ; not out of a fear lest my accounts

* should be thought incredible, but rather because it is not
' easy fully to represent their contempt of all kinds of suf-
' ferings.'a

Perhaps the Galileans mentioned by St. Luke were some
of the followers of the before-mentioned Judas. Josephus
says, he has omitted the greatest part of the sufferings
of that sect. I think it is not difficult to guess the reason.
Judas's principles were very popular among the Jews, but
in the opinion of the Romans they were criminal, as being
inconsistent with subjection to their government. And it
was next to impossible for Josephus to give a particular ac
count of all transactions in Judea relating to this matter,
without offending the Jews, his countrymen, on the one hand,
or the Romans on the other.

But whether the Galileans in St. Luke were men of this
principle is not certain, nor is it material. For though they
were not, the passage just transcribed from Josephus may
satisfy us, that many remarkable events have been omitted
by him upon some account or other.

a Ou yap StdoiKa fir) tig aTTi^iav vTro\r)(j)9y n TWV \tyo[t£Vb)V ITT O.VTOIQ, TOV-
vavnov St fir) tXaaaovwQ TH ZKUVUV /cara0pov»?jLtarog, dtxopera rr\v
piav TTJQ a\yr]dovo£t 6 Xoyog a^rjyrjrai. Ant. 1. xviii. C. 1. sect. 6.

2 A2

356 Credibility of the Gospel History.

CHAP. III.

AN OBJECTION AGAINST THE FIFTEENTH YEAR OF THE

REIGN OF TIBERIUS, COMPARED WITH THE

AGE OF JESUS AT HIS BAPTISM.

I. The objection stated. II. The first solution : That St.
Luke by the fifteenth of Tiberius, might intend the fif
teenth of his proconsular power, not of his sole empire
after the death of Augustus. III. The consistence of
other notes of time in the Gospels with this supposition.
IV. The second solution : That the age of thirty years
ascribed to Jesus at his baptism may be understood with
latitude.

ST. LUKE says, chap. iii. 1, 2, « Now in the fifteenth year
of the reign of Tiberius Ccesar, Pontius Pilate being gover
nor of Judea, — the word of God came unto John the son of
Zacharias in the wilderness. — Now when all the people
were baptized, it came to pass, that Jesus also being bap
tized, and praying, the heaven was opened : And the Holy
Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him,
and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my
beloved Son, in thee 1 am well pleased. And Jesus him
self began to be about thirty years of aye" ver. 23.

Against this account of St. Luke this objection may be
formed. St. Matthew says expressly, that Jesus was " born
in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king."
Though Jesus was born but a month or two before the death
of Herod, he would be at least thirty-one years of age at
his baptism. But if Jesus was born above a year, much
more, if above two years before Herod's death ; then the
age of thirty years here ascribed to him at his baptism,
is absolutely inconsistent with the notes of time mentioned
at the commencement of John the Baptist's ministry; even
allowing that the word of God came to John in the very
beginning of the fifteenth year of Tiberius, and that Jesus
was baptized a few months after.

Before I state this objection at length, I would observe,
that the true genuine meaning' of these words, " Jesus him-
selfa began to be about thirty years of age," is not that he

a Kai avToq rjv o Irjffsg <*)<r« eruv rpta%oj/ra a^o/ifi/of, wv, ic. X.

Of tlie fifteenth Year of Tiberius. 357

then entered the thirtieth year of his age, but that Jesus was
about thirty years of age when he began his ministry : or,
whenb he thus began to show himself publicly. This, I
think, is now the general opinion of learned0 men : so the
Greek word of this text is used by St. Luke in other places.
Thus the high priests and others charge Jesus before Pilate,
saying, Luke xxiii. 5, " He stirreth up the people, teaching
throughout all Jewry, beginning [apfa/tei/ov, having begun]
from Galilee to this place." St. Peter, in the debate con
cerning the choice of an apostle in the room of Judas, says,
Acts i. 21, 22, " Wherefore of these men, which have ac
companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in
and out among us, beginning from the baptism d of John,
unto the same day that he was taken from us, must one be
ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection."

I come now to the objection : Augustus died, and Tibe
rius succeeded him, the 19th of August, A. TJ. 767, Julian
year 59, A. D. 14. Therefore the fifteenth of Tiberius
began the 19th Aug. A. U. 781, A. D. 28. Herod died6
before the passover in A. U. 750, Jul. year 42, or else be
fore the passover in A. U. 751, Jul. year 43. If then John
the Baptist began to preach in the beginning of the fifteenth
of Tiberius, in the latter end of A. U. 781, and Jesus be
supposed to have been baptized by John a few months after,
on the 6th of January of the year following, viz. A. U. 782,
Jesus must have been in the 32d year of his life, if Herod
died in the spring, A. U. 751, and if Jesus was born the
25th Decemb. preceding, viz. A. U. 750. But if Herod
died, A. U. 750, and Jesus was born the 25th Decemb. be
fore, viz. A. U. 749, then he would be at his baptism in the
33d year of his age.

But it may be made appear several ways, that Jesus was
born above a year, probably above two years before Herod
died.

1. This may be inferred from the evangelists themselves.
For it is very probable, that Herod lived a year or more
after the murder of the infants. The wise men having wor
shipped Jesus, when they were departed, Matt. ii. 13, 14,
" Behold, the angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a

b Dr. Clarke's Paraphrase, c Lucae mentem Jansenius

[Con. cap. 14.] optime assecutus est, quam sic exprimit : Sensus erit, et ipse
Jesus erat fere triginta annorum, cum jam suscepto baptismo auspicaretur
deinde munus suum. Bas. ann. Pol. Ecc. ant. D. 5. n. 28. vid. et Anton.
Cappell. de Coena Christi suprema. Sect. 12. c. 23. Mr. Whiston's Short
View of the Harmony, &c. p. 136. d Ev y tiorjXOe KCU

tfyXQtv £0' ry/ioc o Kvpiog Ifjff8£, apZaptvoQ cnro r« /3a7rricr/iaro£ luavva.

* See the Appendix.

358 Credibility of the Gospel History.

dream, saying, Arise, and take the young child and his
mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring
thee word: for Herod will seek the young child to destroy
him. When he arose, he took the young child and his
mother by night, and departed into Egypt. And was there
until the death of Herod" The direction given to Joseph
by the angel, may afford ground to suppose, that Joseph
was to make some stay in Egypt, at least some months, or
more than a few weeks or days : which, from what follows,
appears to have been " till the death of Herod."

Moreover, St. Matthew says, cli. ii. 19, 20, that " when
Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to
Joseph in a dream in Egypt, saying, Arise, take the young
child and his mother, and go into the land of Israel : for
they are dead which sought the young child's life"

It being known from Joseph us, that Antipater died but
five days before his father Herod, it may be inferred from
the use of the plural number, that Antipater is meant by the
angel as well as Herod, and that he had been concerned in
the design to put Jesus to death, and that his cruel inten
tions were one cause of Joseph's removal out of Judea
into Egypt. But Antipater could have no influence on his
father's counsels for ten months or more before Herod died,
as will appear presently : therefore the murder of the in
fants happened, most probably, a year before the death of
Herod.

It may likewise be concluded from St. Matthew's account,
that Jesus was born near two years before the murder of the
infants. For thus he says, cli. ii. 1, 2, " Now when Jesus
was born in Bethlehem of Judea, in the days of Herod the
king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusa
lem, saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews ?
for we have seen his star in the east, and are corne to wor
ship him." Ver. 7. " Then Herod, when he had privily called
the wise men, inquired of them diligently, what time the
star appeared."

The wise men having been to worship the child, and de
parting into their own country without coming back to
Jerusalem, Ver. 16, " Then Herod, when he saw he was
mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent
forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and
in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, ac
cording to the time which he had diligently inquired of the
wise men."

Jesus was born before the wise men came, for their ques
tion was, « Where is he that is born ?" They knew he was

Of the fifteenth Year of Tiberius. 359

born, because they had seen his star in the east. Herod in
quired what time the star appeared, and slew all the chil
dren from two years and under, according- to that time.
Therefore the star had appeared two years before, and
Jesus was born at or near that time.

Nor can the supposed distance between the appearing1 of
the star, and the arrival of the wise men, weaken this cal
culation. There might be many reasons to hinder their
undertaking1 the journey immediately : possibly, they ap
prehended no necessity of setting- out sooner. For allowing
the truth of the fact, that they had seen a star, by which
they understood the birth of a king in Judea, they could
not well make any doubt of his living", or of their having- an
opportunity to worship him, though they delayed a year or
two. But, whatever were the reasons of their delay, we
have no right to depart from the words of St. Matthew ;
who intimates very plainly, that it was two years from the
appearing of the star, to the time in which Herod ordered
the children to be slain.

Add these two years to the fore-mentioned year, which
Herod lived after the slaughter of the children, and it will
appear, that according" to St. Matthew, Jesus was born three
years before Herod's death.

2. It may be proved from Tertullian, that Jesus was born
above two years before the death of Herod : for he says,
that the census or tax made in Judea, at the time of which
Jesus was born, was madef by Sentius Saturninus. But
Josephus assures us, that Quintilius Varus was coine into
Syria as successor to Saturninus, before^ the death of He
rod. It may not be easy to determine exactly from Jose
phus the time of Varus's arrival in Syria : but there are in
being some ancient coins11 or medals of the city of Antioch,
the capital of that province, that demonstrate the time of
his government. One of these coins has on the reverse a
figure representing the city of Antioch, and the name of
Varus with a date in Greek numerals, xxv. And there are
others with the same figure and inscription, with the nume
rals xxvi. xxvii. The first of these coins assures us, that
Varus was in Syria before September, A. U. 748. For the

f Adv. Marc. lib. iv. cap. 19. See above, p. 343.

* Ant. lib. xvii. cap. 5. sect. 2. et alibi. h Scripsit ad me

Card. Norisius, exstare in scrinio illustrissimi Marchionis Ricardi nummum
minimse magnitudinis caput Jovis in antica repraesentantera, in cujus postica
habetur, EIII OYAPOY ANTIOXEQN, mulier sedens pede super figuram
Orontis fluminis, tenens dextra palmam : et in medio EK. id est, Anno xxv.
Pagi, Appar. ad Bar. n. 136. vid. omnino Noris. Epoch. Syromaced. Dissert.
3. cap. 7. et Memoires de 1' Academic des Inscrip. Tom. iv. p. 181. ed. Amst.

360 Credibility of the Gospel History.

cera which the Antiochians used at that time was that of the
Actiac victory, which was obtained, A. U. 723. ' The 25th
year of this sera ended the second of Sept. A. U. 748. ]t
is therefore manifest, that Jesus was born before September
in that year, if Saturninus made the census of which St.
Luke speaks, or if it was made in his time: and if it be
supposed, that Jesus was born on the 25th of December,
then his nativity must necessarily be placed as far back as
the 25th Decemb. A. U. 747.

3. I expect likewise to be here reminded of some things
advanced by me in the first chapter of this book ; and that
it will be urged ; If the oath which Josephus says was
taken by all the Jews to Augustus and Herod, relating to
the census or enrolment which St. Luke speaks of, then Je
sus must have been born three years before the death of
Herod.

Possibly the objection may be stated in this manner :
It cannot be less than ten months from the commencement
of the inquiries made by Herod into the cause of Pheroras's
death, and the crimes of Antipater, to the death of Herod.
When the first discoveries were made, Antipater was at
Rome: Herod sent for him in a very pressing but kind
manner, dissembling all suspicions concerning him, that he
might not delay to return to Judea. Josephus says, that
when Antipater returned, he knew nothing of the accusa
tions which had been brought against him, though k seven
months had then passed from the first discovery of his
crimes. In a day or two after Antipater's return to Judea,
Herod calls a council in which1 he himself and Varus, go
vernor of Syria, presided. Antipater is brought before
them, convicted, and remanded to prison. But Herod not
daring to pronounce sentence on Antipater without leave
from Augustus, expresses were sent to Rome with an ac
count of what had passed. After that these messengers
were sent away from Judea, a letter was intercepted, which
was written to Antipater by Acme a Jewish woman at Rome,
in the service of the empress Livia, in which letter were
fresh proofs of Antipater's designs. Hereupon Herod sent
away fresh despatches to Rome. These return to Judea, and
bring word, that Acme had been put to death by Augustus,

1 Allix supposes, that the Antiochian sera of the Actiac victory does not be
gin till A. U. 724. Vid. Dissert, de J. C. Anno et Mense natali, p. 102. It is
not my business to enter into dispute upon this head : the other opinion seems
to me most probable. Vid. Noris. ubi supra. Pagi. Apparat. n. 103, 104.

Kat TOI fj.(Ta^v rwv tXcy^wv icai TTJQ erravoSa ditXOovTCjV tirra \n\vwv* De
Bell. Lib. i. c. 31. p. 1034. v. 27. ' Ibid. cap. 32,

Of the fifteenth Year of Tiberius. 361

and that the emperor left it to Herod to do with Antipater
as he thought fit. Soon after this Antipater was put to
death, and in five days after Herod died.m

As there was a second embassy sent to Rome after the
trial of Antipater, and this returned before Herod died, with
an account that Acme had been put to death, upon informa
tions they had carried with them to Rome ; it is impossible
to assign less than three months for the interval between the
arrival of Antipater in Judea, and Herod's death, which
added to the former seven make ten months.

It being supposed in the first chapter, that the execution
which Herod made in his own family happened at the same
time with the slaughter of the children at Bethlehem ; it must
next be considered, how long time that execution preceded
the first inquiries into Antipater's designs. The facts men
tioned by Josephus in this interval stand thus.

Herod having put to death several of his courtiers and
servants, calls his friends together, charges Pheroras's wife
with creating disturbances, and insists upon it that Pheroras
put her away. Pheroras loving his wife too well to comply
with this demand, the two brothers fall out. Pheroras
leaves Herod, and goes to his tetrarchy, withal swearing
solemnly never to come to Herod more. About this time,
as it seems, Antipater, with his father's consent, left Judea
and went to Rome. Soon after Pheroras was gone home,
Herod fell sick ; but though Herod sent for Pheroras, he
would not come to him. Not long after, Pheroras is sick ;
Herod goes to see him, they are reconciled, Pheroras dies.
Herod has him brought to Jerusalem and buried there."

When Pheroras was buried, some of his servants made
application to Herod, desiring him to inquire into the man
ner and causes of Pheroras's death. These inquiries open
a horrid scene of wickedness. And it appears, that a con
spiracy had been formed by Antipater to poison his father
Herod ; and that he had committed the execution of this
design to Pheroras, and servants of his own, whom he had
left behind him when he went to Rome, and who were to
obey Pheroras's directions.0

It will not be easy to allot less than three months for the
facts just now mentioned, in the interval between the exe
cution in Herod's family, and the first inquiries into the
cause of Pheroras's death. Three months added to the for
mer ten make thirteen.

m Vid. Jos. de Bell. 1. i. c. 30—33. Ant. 1. xvii. c. 3—8.

11 Joseph, de Bell. lib. i. cap. 29. sect. 4. Ant. lib. xvii. cap. 3.

0 De Bell. ibid. cap. 30. Ant. ibid. 4.

362 Credibility of the Gospel History.

The execution spoken of by Joseph us, and the slaughter
of the children mentioned by St. Matthew, being* allowed
to have happened both at the same time, the interval be
tween the birth of Jesus and this execution is already com
puted. It cannot be less than a year and nine or ten
months, that is, near two years ; consequently, we have a
fresh argument that Jesus was born three years before the
death of Herod : but how inconsistent this is with Jesus
being " about thirty years of age" in the fifteenth year of
Tiberius, appears from what has been said already.

Having now stated these objections, and given them their
full force, as I imagine ; before I proceed to offer a reply, I
would make two or three reflections upon some particulars
contained in them.

I do allow that it appears to me highly probable, that
Herod did live a year at least after the slaughter of the
infants.

But as for Tertullian's .testimony, that the tax in Judea
was made by Saturninus, I think it is not of much weight ;
since he is the only person that has said this, arid he
flourished not till about two hundred years after the event.
Besides, though Tertullian was well skilled in the Roman
laws and customs, he has committed many gross blunders in
history. The reader may see several of them collected byP
Doduell in his Dissertations upon Irenaeus. One of them
is the computation Tertullian has made of the time, from
the nativity of Jesus to the taking of Jerusalem^ by Ves
pasian ; which, according to him, was not full fifty-three
years. And in reckoning up the reigns of the several em
perors, he has quite omitted that of Claudius, and allotted
not quite ten years to the reign of Nero. He, who could
make such mistakes in the history of the Roman emperors,
might very easily be ignorant who was president of Syria at
the time of our Saviour's nativity.

Nor am I satisfied with the proofs offered in these ob
jections, that Jesus was born two years before the slaughter
of the children at Bethlehem. Whitbyr questions whether
a™ £teT8? Kai Ka-rwrepiv, should not be rendered from " one
year old" and under, rather than from " two years old" and
under. But let ^e-ny* signify two years, yet I think no
conclusion can be made about the precise time of the birth
of Jesus from Herod's orders. It is most likely, that this
star appeared some time before the birth of Jesus, and that
it was understood by the wise men to pre-signify it. Here-

P Dissert, iii. sect. 13. « Vid. Tertul. advers. Jud. cap. 8.

r Matt. ii. 16.

Of the fifteenth Year of Tiberius. 363

by they were prepared for their journey, and it is highly
probable, that these wise men came into Judea to worship
this King, as soon as they could, after they concluded he
was born, and that they arrived at Jerusalem in a very few
months after his birth. But since their inquiry was, " Where
is he that is born King of the Jews ?" Herod, whose cruelty
had in a manner no bounds, orders all children near Bethle
hem to be slain who had been born since the appearing of
the star; or perhaps even for some space8 before the time,
at which, after an exact inquiry of the wise men, he perceived
it had appeared.

As there appears not any proof from St. Matthew, that
Jesus was born two years, or near two years before the
slaughter of the infants; so, I think also, that there are no
proofs in Josephus, that the oath taken by the Jews had
preceded two years, or near two years, the execution made
in Herod's court. The oath and the execution are related
by Josephus both together. The reader is referred to that
passage, as also to the charge brought against Pheroras's
wife immediately after that execution was over: among
other things in the charge Herod says, — * That she did all
' she could to create a difference between him and his bro-

* ther; that the fine imposed upon the pharisees had been
' evaded by her means ; and that in the present affair no-

* thing had been done without her.' This present affair I
suppose to relate to the predictions given out by the pha
risees, that God would take away the kingdom from Herod
and his children. The payment of the fine is the last crime
she is charged with before this affair, which had preceded
the execution ; it certainly therefore is not a crime of two
years' standing. Herod, in so long a time, might have found
out some new fault in a woman he was so much offended
with. We may be pretty well assured from this account,
if I mistake not, that this oath had preceded the said exe
cution and predictions but some few months only.

Supposing then the execution to be truly dated in the
objection, at about thirteen months before the death of
Herod, we may infer, that the oath in Josephus, and the
description in St. Luke, was made, and that Jesus was born
about a year and six or seven months before Herod's death.

If indeed Antipater had been at Rome two years before
he was recalled by his father, as some learned men have
thought, then this execution must have been made above

8 Neque vero sequitur, si Herodes, omni modo cavens ne puer elaberetur,
latius saevitiam extendit, non minus in aetate quam loci ratione, ideo stellam
quoque tanto ante apparuisse. Grot, ad Matt. ii. 1.

364 Credibility of the Gospel History.

thirteen months before Herod's death ; because it is likely,
or rather certain, that Antipater was in Judea at the time of
that execution. But I think it is a mistake to suppose he
had been so long out of Judea. Antipater staid some time
in Judea after his brothers Alexander and Aristobulus were1
dead ; and took a great deal of pains to defeat and set aside
the advantageous marriages, which Herod designed for their
children : he also entered into cabals with Pheroras and his
wife, in order to secure the succession for himself: more
over, Saturninus was got to Rome a good while before
Antipater went from home. Josephus says in his Antiqui
ties, that Antipater having resolved, if possible, to hasten
his father's death, and being desirous to strengthen and
secure his own interest, that he might reign after him ; * He
' remitted large sums of money to his father's friends at

* Rome, that he might gain their good will, but especially
6 that he might have the favour of Saturninus the governor
' of Syria.' u Saturninus is not here called governor of Syria
because he was then actually in that post, for he is mani
festly at Rome, but to distinguish him from others of that
name, of which there were many. And it appears from the
parallel place in the War of the Jews, that one favour which
Antipater desired of these persons at Rome, who had in
fluence on his father, was, that they would write to Herod
that his [Antipater's] presence at Rome would be service
able to him in the present posture of affairs. Antipater had
now settled all things with Pheroras for the poisoning of
Herod, as soon as an opportunity offered : but Antipater, so
long as he staid in Judea, could not forbear conversing
with Pheroras and his wife, which was extremely disagree
able to Herod. ' Therefore Antipaterv contrived, by the
' interest of friends at Rome, to procure leave for a voyage
' thither. These writing, that it would be very proper for

* Antipater to be sent to Caesar without delay ; he [Herod]

* immediately sent him thither, having furnished him with
' a sumptuous equipage and large sums of money, giving

* him also his will to carry with him to the emperor.'

It is true, that after Antipater's journey to Rome, mention
is made of Saturninus as in Syria; but then it is, because
Josephus relates a fact that had happened before Antipater

1 Antiq. lib. xvii. cap. 1. u KaijuaXi<=ra rsg ETTI 'Pw/njc

nOMITAIS fityaXwv Swpeuv evvug KaGt^afjifvOQ, Trpo TTCLVTOIV Se Sar«pvi-

vj TOV Tr)Q Supiaf eTTtfjitXijTirjv' ibid. p. 750. v. 10.

v ITpayjuareuerai, diet TUIV tTTt TTJQ IraXiag <f>i\wv, Trjv tiq 'Pw/U7jv

>' ypa^/avrwv yap ticavwv, dtiv Avrnrarpov TrEjjL^Oijvai Sia %povs ?rpO£
Ka«rapa, 6 Se art /i£XX»j<7rt£ t^t-xt^t, K. X. de Bell. lib. i. c. 29. sect. 2.

Of the fifteenth Year of Tiberius. 365

went from Judea. Josephus, giving an account of what
Antipater did at Rome, mentions w some accomplices of
Syllseus sent thither by Saturninus to answer for themselves.
But this might have been done by Saturninus some time
before.

Again, if Antipater had been two years out of Judea,
Herod, who wanted plausible reasons to induce him to re
turn, could not have failed to have put this, of his long ab
sence, into his letters, as a very cogent and unexceptionable
argument, which yet he does not appearx to have done.

It may be further argued, that Antipater's journey to
Rome did not precede the death of Herod two years. The
very commencement of the inquiries into the death of Phe-
roras, could not be above ten months before the death of
Herod, as has been shown already. A great progress had
been made in those examinations ; Doris, Antipater's mother,
had been detected and put out of y Herod's house ; Mari-
amne the high priest's daughter2 was also put away, and
her son struck out of a new will Herod had made. ' When
these things were doing,' says Josephus, * Bathyllus, An
tipater's freedman, arrived from Rome, and being put to
the question, was discovered to have brought with him a
fresh quantity of poison to be given to his [Antipater's]
mother and Pheroras, and that if the former had failed to
despatch the king, they might trya this upon him.' Before
Antipater had gone to Rome, he had provided b poison for
Pheroras to give his father. It is plain, that when Bathyl
lus was sent from Rome, Antipater did not know whether
Pheroras had made any use of the first poison or not, and that
he had still a full confidence in him : but if Antipater had
been gone from Judea two years, and had heard nothing of
the effect of that poison, such a delay would have created
suspicions. Moreover, this second preparation appears to
be sent to back the former ; so that we may be assured, we
are to go backward, not years, but only some months, for
the true time of Antipater's leaving Judea.

Once more, the first opening of the inquiries into the
causes of Pheroras's death has been laid at about ten months
before the death of Herod. That Antipater was then but

w De Bell. ibid. sect. 3. Ant. lib. xvii. cap. 3. sect. 2. x See the

substance of these letters. De Bell. lib. i. cap. 31. sect. 3. Ant. lib. xvii. cap.
5- sect- I- y Ant. lib. xvii. cap. 4. sect. 2. z Ibid.

Ev TST^^t KUI Ba0u\Ao£ 6K 'Pwjujjg a7T£\eu0£pog AvriTrarps iraprjv, icai

ry rt avT

W£ ft TO Trportpov fir) UTTTOITO TB (3aai\tu£t TSTQ yav ju£rax«pi^oivro avrdv.
Ibid. sect. 3. De Bell. cap. 31. sect. 1. b Ant. ibid, sect 3.

De Bell. ibid. cap. 30. sect. 5.

366 Credibility of the Gospel History.

newly set out for Rome, may be inferred from hence. Phe-
roras being* dead, Herod had him brought to Jerusalem,
honoured him with a funeral, and made great lamentations
for him. * This,' says Josephus, * was the beginning of sor-
' row to Antipater, though0 he was then sailed to Rome,

* God requiring* of him the blood of his brothers. I shall
' give a particular relation of this whole affair, that it may
' be an admonition to all mankind to adhere to the practice

* of virtue.' If Antipater had been then any long1 time out
of Judea, Josephus would have said, though he was then at
Rome, or thougli he had been some time there. It is possi
ble, Antipater might have been gone from home a month
or two ; but the phrase here used by Josephus seems to me
to import, that there were not yet come to Jerusalem any
tidings of Antipater's arrival at Rome.

I hope it will be excused, that I have insisted so long
upon this point. The supposition, that Antipater was gone
to Rome before the removal of Saturninus, and two years
or more before the death of Herod, has caused much con
fusion in the chronology of many learned men about this
time.

There is in Josephus another passage, not yet observed

by any one upon this occasion, that I know of, which may

help to determine the time of the execution made by Herod

in his court and at Jerusalem, and which will confirm my

opinion about it. Josephus, having given the history of

Herod's putting to death his two sons Alexander and Aris-

tobulus, makes divers reflections upon that action. ' It

might have been sufficient,' says he,d ' even supposing

them guilty of the crimes laid to their charge, to have

condemned them to perpetual imprisonment, or to have

banished them, but to take away their lives was a piece of

downright cruelty. Nor does the delay extenuate the

crime ; for after deliberation, having been resolved at one

time and in suspense at another, to commit such a fact, is

an argument of a cruel disposition, and of a mind obsti

nately bent upon wickedness : which same temper he

showed afterwards upon another occasion, when he spared

c Kai irevOoQ /zeya ETT' avry irpotQero' TXTO AvTiTrctTpy KaiTOiye eiri '
7T£ TrXev KOTI KaK(t)v eyfveTO ap%r], Ti]Q adeXtyoKTOViae avTOV TIVV^VS rs 6£8, K. X.
Ant. 1. xvii. c. 3. sect. 3. d Ev wzaffei de, KUI

TToXAafctf /i£v 6pjurj0£JTa TroXXaKiQ tie fJLeXXrjffavTa, TO TtXtvTaiov de v
Kat Sia7rpa%aa9ai, QovuatjG icai dvfffJieraKivrjTa ^u%7jc airo TWV

Jffe dt /cat TOIQ avQig UK aTTOff^o/ievof adf. TCOV TrepiXonrwv offsg iSoKti 0ira-

^' Ot£ TO \LIV SlKCtlOV tXdTTOV £7TOt£l ffVpTTaQtiaOdl TSQ CtiroXXvptVUS, TO St

6[j.oiov rjv, 7vto pride €Ktivo)v 0«<ra/i£j^/ StiZipev Se virep O.VTW f%i}G a(j>rj~
Ant. 1. xvi. c. ult. ad fin.

Of the fifteenth Year of Tiberius. 367

not others, [or the rest,] persons who seemed to be the
most dear to him of any. The justice of their punish
ment abates our compassion for their ruin, but yet his
cruelty was alike here also, in that he spared not even
them. But of these more in course by and by.'
This last piece of cruelty, I take to mean the execution
made by Herod in his court, and which Josephus relates
afterwards in the next book of these Antiquities. It cannot
refer to the death of Antipater, because he is but one ; nor
to the design upon the chief men of Judea shut up in the
Circus, because they had committed no offence, and that
design was never executed ; nor to the rabbies, because they
do not appear to have ever been dear to Herod : but it
must be the before-mentioned execution, of which I hope
the reader has a clear idea. Then Herod put to death all
of his own family, that adhered to the things said by the
pharisees, and other persons, who appear to have been fa
vourites with him. And it is observable, that as in that
account Josephus is pleased to divert himself with those
executions ; so here also, even when he is aggravating' the
cruelty of Herod, he betrays the same good will toward
those who then suffered under the rage of this inhuman
tyrant.

It would be desirable here to settle exactly the time when
these two sons of Herod were put to death. Allix6 places
the council of Berytus, before which they were tried, and
by which they were condemned, in the month of May, A.
U. 749, about ten months before Herod died. But if He
rod died in the spring, A. U. 750, as Allix supposes, this
council is certainly placed by him too late. It is evident,
from particulars insisted on in the objection, and since
allowed, or mentioned by me, that it must have preceded
the death of Herod above ten months. Moreover, Saturni-
nus was one of this council, and if the first medal and the
epoch above mentioned be allowed, Saturninus was gone
from Syria before Sept. 748. It may be however supposed,
I think, that this council was not held long before the re
moval of Saturninus: and it is certain from the passage just
transcribed, that the execution of the pharisees and others
at Jerusalem, happened some considerable time after the
death of Alexander and Aristobulus.

If any should object, that according to the account I have
given of the oath or enrolment, that it was owing to the
displeasure of Augustus against Herod ; it cannot be placed

e — Conventum Berytensem, qui habitus est in causa Alexandri et Aristo-
bull Maio mense. A. U. 749. ibid. p. 18. vid. etiam p. 13. et alibi.

368 Credibility of the Gospel History.

so near the end of Herod's reign as I here suppose, but
must have happened a considerable time before the removal
of Saturninus ; because Augustus appears to have been re
conciled to Herod before Saturninus left the province, and
before the council at Berytus, in which Alexander and
Aristobulus were condemned : I answer, that the enrolment is
not placed by me too late at all. It might be resolved upon
by Augustus before, and yet not be executed till after
Saturninus went away. And though Augustus might be in
some measure pacified, yet he might think fit to have the
assessment made. Besides, though Joseph us says, that upon
the applications which Nicolas of Damascus had made to
Augustus at Rome, the emperor was reconciled to Herod ;
that Sylloeus was ordered home, required to pay the money
he owed, and give all proper satisfaction, and wasf after
wards to be punished : yet it is certain, that Syllseus did
not give Herod, or any one else, satisfaction. And it may
be from thence inferred, that Herod was not fully reinstated
in Augustus's favour, for then Syllseus would have been
more submissive. Josephus, relating Antipater's voyage to
Rome, of which we have made frequent mention, says :
' Syllseus the Arabian = also went thither at the same time,
' not having performed any of those things which Ca?sar
' enjoined : and Antipater accused him to Caesar upon the
* same heads he had been before accused of by Nicolas.'
From what has been said concerning the time of Antipater's
journey, it appears, that this accusation must have been
brought against Syllaeus in the last year of Herod's life.

It is evident, that Herod's affairs were not in a good pos
ture at this time at Rome: if they had, Antipater could not
have made the state of them, and the service he might do
his father there, a pretence for his journey. Moreover, An
tipater11 charged Herod with a sum of two hundred talents,
laid out chiefly, as he pretended, in the cause against Syl
laeus, his father's great enemy. From all which it is rea
sonable to conclude, that Nicolas had, in his history, out of
regard to his master and himself, magnified the success of
his negociations at Rome. Nor can it be justly expected

f Kat 7T£pac tiq rare KUTI<ZT] Kcttvap, u>£ TS fttv SvXXata Karayvuvai Sfava-
TOV, 'Hpw^y £e £iaXXarrt<70ai. — TO £t ffVfnrav, 6 ptv 2vXXaiO£ avfTTtpTrtro, rag
SucaQ /cat TO. xpfa 7"°l£ $i&avtt.Koaiv a7ro<5w<rwi'» ttra oi/rw KoXa<70?j(TO/i£vof. Ant.
1. xvi. c. 10. sect. 9. e 2we4'op/x^ £« Avrnrarp^

KO.I 2vXXaio£ 6 Apa^/, firjctv <Jv TrpoatraZf Kaiffap ^taTTETrpay/xtfo^* sat A.VTI-
7rarpo£ avrn car^yopfi £7n Kaicrapof, Trtpi w'v irpoTtpov Nt/coXao£. Ib. 1. xvii.
c. 3. sect. 2. h AictKoatg. -ysv avaXw/zarog, avjjvfyxre

raXavra, teat TSTWV fityi^rj 7rpo0a<ri£ rjv fj Trpog SvXXmov £007* De Bell. lib. i.
c. 31. sect. 2.

Of the fifteenth Year of Tiberius. 369

from an historian, that when he conies down to the affairs of
his own time, he should be perfectly indifferent toward those
in which he acted a part himself.

Having' now cleared the way, I would lay down two or
three conclusions.

1. I apprehend it appears from what has been here of
fered, that there is no necessity of placing the birth of
Jesus above a year and six months before the death of He
rod. If Herod died in March, A. U. 750, I should be
inclined to place the nativity of Jesus in September or Oc
tober, A. U. 748 : if Herod died in March 751, then the
nativity of Jesns might very well be placed in September
or October, 749. As I am not able fully to determine the
time of Herod's death, 1 shall for the future have some re
gard to both these dates of our Saviour's nativity.

2. The account that has been given above of the time of
Saturninus's removal, and Varus's arrival in the province
of Syria, does also incline us to one of these dates. It is
not improbable, that the oath was taken, or the assessment
made, much about the same time that Varus came into Syria.
And it is supposed by many learned men, that the Roman
governors usually came from Rome into these eastern pro
vinces at the latter end of the summer. It is certain, that
upon the removal of Archelaus, when Cyrenius came go
vernor into Syria, there was an assessment made in Syria
and Judea. I am the rather inclined to think this the time
of the oath, because Josephus in his history does not relate
when it was taken, but mentions it only upon occasion of a
disturbance at Jerusalem, which had a connexion with it.
And it is observable, that he has said nothing of Varus, nor
of the concerns of Syria, till we hear of Varus being at
Jerusalem when Antipater returned home ; but, if those
medals are to be relied on, Varus had now been a good
while in Syria. There is therefore in Josephus a long gap
in the concerns of Syria, and also in the public concerns of
Judea, from the council at Berytus to the execution at Je
rusalem : during this time of Josephus's silence, 1 suppose
the assessment was made. According to the first of the
Antiochian medals, Varus came into Syria before Sept. 748:
if this be supposed the most likely date of his government,
and if it be also most probable that Herod died, A. U. 750,
these may strongly dispose us to place the nativity of Jesus
in September or October, 748.

3. The latter part of the summer, or the autumn season,
seems to be the most likely time of the year for the birth of
Jesus ; there is no particular reason to determine us to the

VOL. i. 2 u

$70 Credibility of the Gospel History.

25th of December. The very depth of winter is not a very
proper season for a survey and assessment, when people are
to enter themselves according- to their tribes or families : the
autumn, when harvest and vintage are over, is a time of
general leisure. When Jesus was born at Bethlehem,
" there were in the same country shepherds abiding* in the
field, keeping watch over their flocks by night," Luke ii. 8.
In some very mild climates sheep may be abroad in the night
time in December ; but it is not very likely, they should be
so in those countries where they must be attended by shep
herds : this circumstance is not very favourable to the sup
position, that Jesus was born the 25th of December, and
we are at liberty to place it in autumn, a more likely
season.

It is not improbable, then, that Jesus might be born some
time between the middle of August and the middle of No
vember. Cyrenius, we may suppose, came into Judea at
the time, or soon after the time, that Varus came governor
into Syria, and published the decree of Augustus, requiring
all people to enter themselves, their dependents, and estates.
Judea was a country of a narrow compass, and the assess
ment might very well be made in two or three months.
Cyrenius coming into the country, and being a man of
despatch in all his undertakings ; being1 desirous also to
hasten to Rome to receive the honours decreed him for the
victory over the Homonadenses ; being also concerned to
set sail before the bad weather came on, he appointed all
people to enrol themselves with all expedition within a
certain limited time, which they did accordingly, ver. 3,
" And all went to be taxed, every one in his own city."
The short time appointed for this work may be fairly con
cluded from St. Luke's history of it. If the space of time
allotted for it had been of any considerable length, it can
not be thought but that Joseph would have taken an op
portunity to go to Bethlehem some while before the time of
the virgin's delivery, or else have deferred the journey till
that was over. There is not the least hint, that this journey
was taken just at this season, in obedience to a divine ad
monition ; it is given us as the pure result of obedience to
this decree of Augustus.

We will now lay together a few events of this time, in
the order in which it may be supposed they happened.

About a year and six or seven months before the death
of Herod, soon after the arrival of Varus in the province of
Syria, in August or September, A. U. 748, or 749, Julian
year, 40 or 41, Cyrenius [or some other person of eminence]

Of the fifteenth Year of Tiberius. 371

came into Judea, an assessment was made there, and in the
time of it, Jesus was born at Bethlehem, in the month of
September or October. After the term of forty days was
expired, Jesus was presented in the temple at Jerusalem, and
Mary made her offering' according to the law. When these
things were finished, they went from Jerusalem, and dwelt
in some city of Judea, possibly at Bethlehem. In the year
following, viz. A. U. 749, or 750, about the beginning" of
February, came " wise men from the east to Jerusalem, say
ing, Where is he that is born king of the Jews ?" they
being guided by the star, which they " had seen in the
east, went and worshipped him." After their departure, the
virgin and the child Jesus being now fit for travelling,
Joseph was admonished by " an angel, to take the young-
child and his mother, and flee into Egypt ;" which he did.
Herod soon perceiving'.from the wise men's not returning to
him, that he had been mocked by them, and being much
enraged thereat, " sent forth and slew all the children that
were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two
years old and under, according to the time which he had
diligently inquired of the wise men." He also put to death
at the same time divers pharisees, and other persons at Jeru
salem, some of his own family and attendants ; who, being
before in expectation of the coming of a great prince, who
was to rise up from among them, and by the arrival of the
wise men had been confirmed in the belief that this event
was now at hand, expressed themselves in terms, which
Herod and his son Antipater and their flatterers termed
seditious. Immediately after these executions, Pheroras's
wife was called to an account also, as being supposed to
have entertained the same principles with these pharisees ;
to whom she had lately shown great favour, in paying the
fine imposed upon them for not entering themselves, nor
taking- the appointed oath in the time of the fore-mentioned
assessment. Pheroras not submitting to the orders given
him by Herod in council to put away his wife, Herod
and Pheroras fell out : hereupon, in the latter end of
February, or beginning of March, the same year, Pheroras
retires with his wife to his tetrarchy. And Antipater
having before this, by various practices, and particularly
by' letters procured from Rome, disposed his father to

1 The account of Antipater's sending letters and presents to Rome is Antiq.
lib. xvii. cap. 1. sect. 1. of Herod's last quarrel with Pheroras, his forbidding
Antipater to converse with Pheroras, or his wife ; of Antipater's journey to
Rome, and Pheroras's retirement, is ibid. cap. 3. In the War. [lib. i. cap. 29.
rat. 2.] Antipater's letters to Rome, and his journey, are mentioned together;

2 B2

372 Credibility of the Gospel History.

consent to his making a journey into Italy ; and sup
posing, that by the execution now just over, all turbulent
spirits had been awed, and that peace and quiet might
ensue, set sail for Rome. In the latter end of April, or the
beginning of May following, Pheroras dies, is brought to
Jerusalem, and buried : no sooner is the mourning for him
over, but his servants apply to Herod to make inquiry into
the causes of his death ; and now in the middle of May, or
soon after, the examinations into this matter began : and
though Anti pater was sailed from Judea for Rome, and got
at a distance from the place in which justice ought to be
executed on him, and therefore, according to the ordinary
course of things, it might have been supposed he was in
safety ; yet from this time the divine vengeance began to
prepare itself against him, till at last it fell upon him for all
his horrid crimes. The evidence was at first obscure and
imperfect, but opened continually more and more : Herod,
in his letters to Antipater, dissembled his resentments, but
earnestly pressed his return to Judea. About the middle
of December, seven months after the first inquiry into the
cause of Pheroras's death, Antipater arrived at Jerusalem :
and is tried before Herod, and Varus president of Syria,
and condemned to death. Herod, however, not daring to
proceed to execute the sentence without express leave from
Augustus, sent ambassadors to Rome with a full account of
what had passed ; and soon after a second embassy, new
evidence having been found after the departure of the
former. These last ambassadors return to Judea, with full
power from Augustus, about the middle of March, A. U.
750, or 751 ; soon after which Antipater was executed, and
in five days after Herod himself died, about a year and five
or six months after the birth of Jesus.

Upon the whole, I presume, it appears we lie under no
necessity of dating the birth of Jesus before the latter end
of the year of Rome 748, or 749. We hereby in part abate
the objection, as stated above; but still we have before us
undoubtedly a very great difficulty. We will now inquire
what can be said to it.

II. 1. When St. Luke says, " Now in the fifteenth year
of the reign of Tiberius, — the word of God came unto John ;"
he may intend some computation of the reign of Tiberius,
different from that of his sole empire after the death of Au
gustus. It is no unusual thing, for the reigns of princes to

but as his journey is here also represented as the effect of advice brought
from Rome, it is supposed that these letters were sent by him some time before*
And Pheroras's retirement is the thing next mentioned.

Of the fifteenth Year of Tiberius. 373

be computed from several dates. There were two compu
tations of Nebuchadnezzar's reign. For, as Prideaux ob
serves, * Nabopol laser, king of Babylon, being old and in
firm, took his son Nebuchadnezzar into partnership in the
empire, and sent him with an army into those parts [Syria
and Palestine]. And from hence the Jewish computation
of the years of Nebuchadnezzar's reign begins. — But ac
cording to the Babylonians, his reign is not reckoned to
begin till after his father's death, which happened two years
afterwards. And both computations being found in scrip
ture, it is necessary to say so much here for the reconciling
of them.'k And there were two or three ways of com
puting the reijni of 'Cyrus.

•»•» i

but to come nearer to our time ; there were many com
putations of the reign of m Augustus. Some computed the
beginning of his reign from the year in which Julius Caesar
was killed ; as n Josephus, who says, Augustus reigned
fifty-seven years six months and odd days. Some from
the year after, and reckoned his reign fifty-six years; others
computed from the year in which the victory was obtained
at0 Actium, and say, he reigned forty-four years ; others
from the year after, as Ptolemy in his canon, and St. Cle-
mentP of Alexandria, and give him only forty-three years.
And Herod reigned thirty-four years from the death of An-
tigonus, thirty-seven from die time he was declared king of
Judea by the** Roman senate.

2. There seems to be very good reason to conclude, from
divers passages of the Roman historians, and the most
ancient Christian writers, that there were two different
computations of the beginning of Tiberius's reign ; one
from the time he was made colleague with Augustus, and
the other from his sole empire after the death of Augustus.
Several very learned men and very eminent chronologersr
are of opinion, that St. Luke intenas the former of these two
computations. I shall give a brief account of the grounds

k Conn. Part. i. p. 60, ] Marshall's Treatise of the

70 Weeks, p. 44. m Vid. Petav. Rationarium Temp.

Par. 2. 1. iii. cap. 15. Pagi. Appar. n. 66—73, 103, 114.

n Antiq. 1. xviii. c. 2. sect. 2. De Bell. 1. ii. c. 9. sect. 1.

0 Atque ab eo tempore exercitibus comparatis, primum cum M. Antonio.
Marcoque Lepido, dein lantum cum Antonio per duodecim fere annos, no-
vissime per quatuor et quadraginta solus rempublicam tenuit. Sueton. in
August, c. 8. vid. Dio. 1. li. P Strom, p. 339. A. Edit. Paris.

1 Joseph, de Bell. 1. i. c ult. sect. 8. Antiq. 1 xvii. cap. 8. sect. 1.

r Herwaertus in nova et vera Chronologia, c. 248. Usser. Ann. A. M.
4015. Joann. Cleric. Dissertatio. de Ann. Vitae Christi. Prideaux Conn. Part,
ii. Book ix. A. D. xii. Pagi, Critic, in Baron. A. Chr. 11. 71. 1 17. 147.

374 Credibility of the Gospel History.

there are for this supposition, taken chiefly from Pagi ; who
appears to have bestowed a great deal of pains upon this
argument, and must be allowed to have treated it with great
accuracy and judgment.

(1.) That Augustus did in part lay aside government
some time before he died, may be inferred from the words
of an uncertain author of a panegyric, in which, in the name
of the city of Rome, he dissuades Maximianus Herculeus
from resigning the empire. 4 Is it fit,' says he, 4 that you
* should now give yourself a discharge, and do that so soon,
' which Augustus did not do till after the seventieth year
4 of his age, and the fiftieth of s his reign ?'

(2.) Several of the Roman historians have expressly men
tioned Tiberius's being taken into partnership in the go
vernment with Augustus.

Velleius Paterculus, who lived in the reigns of these two
emperors, says ; * That at the desire of Augustus there was
4 a law passed by the senate and people of Rome, that Ti-
4 berius might have equal power with him in all the pro-
4 vinces and* armies.' Suetonius says; * There was a law
6 made, that Tiberius should govern the provinces jointly
4 with Augustus, arid make the census withu him.' Tacitus
says ; ' That Tiberius was made colleague in the empire
4 (with Augustus), taken into partnership in the tribunician
4 power, and recommended v to all the armies.' And there
are in this last-mentioned w historian frequent references to
Tiberius's partnership in the empire with Augustus.

s Quo usque hoc, Maximiane, patiar, me quati, te quiescere, mihi libertatem
adimi, te usurpare tibi illicitam missionem ? An quod Divo Augusto post
septuaginta setatis, quinquaginta imperil, non licuit annos, tarn cito licuit tibi ?
Panegyr. cap. 11. laudat. a Pagio. Critic. A. Ch. 11. n. iii.

1 Cum res Galliarum maximae molis, accensasque plebis Viennensiurn dis-
sensiones, coercitione magis quam pcena molisset, et Senatus Populusque Rom.
(postulante patre ejus) ut aequum ei jus in omnibus provinces exercitibusque
essef, quam erat ipsi, decreto complexus esset — in urbem reversus, jampridem
debitum, sed continuatione bellorum dilatum, ex Pannoniis Dalmatiisque egit
triumphum. Vellei. lib. ii. cap. 121.

u A Germania in urbem post biennium regressus, triumphum, quem distule-

rat, egit. Dedicavit et Concordise sedem : item Pollucis et Castoris, suo

fratrisque nomine, de manubiis. Ac non multo post, lege per Coss. lata, ut
provincias cum Augusto communiter administraret, simulque censum ageret,
condito lustro in Illyricum profectus est. Suet, in Tiber, cap. 20, 21.

v Drusoque pridem extincto, Nero solus e privignis erat: illic cuncta ver-
gere : films, collega imperii, censors tribunitiae potestatis adsumitur, onmisque
per exercitus ostentatur Tacit. An. lib. i. cap. 3.

w Etenim Augustus, paucis ante annis, cum Tiberio tribuniciam potestatem a
patribus rursum postularet, &c. id. ib. cap. 10. Versae inde ad Tiberium
preces. Et ille varie disserebat, de magnitudine imperii, sua modestia ; solam
Divi August! mentem tantse molis capacem: se, in partcm curcrum

Of the fifteenth Year of Tiberius. 375

I must be allowed to be particular in the account of some
thing's said by Dio. In his history of the affairs, A. U. 765,
A. D. 12, he says : ' Augustus x now advanced in years,
' recommended in a writing Germanicus to the senate, and

* the senate to Tiberius. He did not however read the
' writing himself, (not being able,) but Germanicus, as he
' had been wont to do. — But yet he did not Jay aside the
' care of the public.' — Under the next year, A. U. 766, A.
D. 13, the same historian says : « Augustus then accepted y

* for the fifth time, though unwillingly, the government of

* the state for ten years, and renewed also the tribunician

* power to Tiberius.' He says also, ' That Augustus,2 on
' account of his great age, (which likewise hindered his
i coming to the senate, except very rarely,) desired he might

* have twenty annual counsellors. — And a decree was passed,
' that whatever was enacted in council by him, together

* with Tiberius, and those said counsellors, and the consuls
' in being', and the consuls elect, and his grandsons adopted
' by him, and any others, whom he should call to his coun-

* cil, should be ratified, and deemed of the same authority,

* as if enacted by the authority of the whole senate.' This
mention of Tiberius, and of him only by name, in this de
cree of the senate, next after Augustus, appears to me re
markable. I do not observe, that any of these passages of
Dio have been quoted by Pagi ; for what reason he omitted
them I do not know. He has however insisted upon an
other passage of this historian, taken from the preceding
year, A. U. 764, A. D. 11 ; but his argument from it seems
to me to be founded upon a forced and arbitrary construc
tion of Dio ; and therefore I content myself with referring
the reader for it toa him, and bMr. Le Clerc, who also lays
a stress upon it.

Once more, Dio says, i That upon the death of Augustus,
4 Tiberius immediately0 sent away letters from Nola to the

vocatum, experiendo didicisse, quam arduum — regendi cuncta onus. Ibid.
cap. 11. x 'O £t drf Ai>y8<ro£ tKtivov re, t/g

icai £?ri yqpwc; uv, Ty (3s\y, icai ravT'nv T<<> Ti/3ept<£» TrapaKariBtTO' avtyvu 6e TO
jStfiXiov 8/c O.VTOQ (a yap oloc rt rjv jtjojviaKtiv} aXX1 6 TfpfjiaviKOQ, vairtp tioj-
Qti'—x jusvroi /cat raXXa rjTTov n Tropa TKTO SitoKtt. Dio. 1. Ivi. p. 587. B. C.

y T))V Tt TrpOTOHTtaV T(t>V KOIVWV Tt]V StKtTlV, Tf]V TTfjUTTT^V O.K<OV Sf] O A-VJS^OQ

£Aa/3«, Kcri r^ Ttj8tpt^> Tt]v t%a<nav TTJV ^/juapxt/c?;v avQiq tSwKf. Ib. p. 588. B.
z Kai ffujUjSsXag, VTTO TS yrjpa>£ (vfj)1 ovTTtp aSe ff TO (3&\tVTT]piov tri, TrXrjv
<nravi<jJTara, awttyoiTo) tiKomv iTrjomQ rjTrjaaTO' — icai 7rpo0t\l/r]<j)ia9ii, navO?
oaa av avTtp )uera rt TS Tt/3fpta KO.I /utr' EKEIVWV, TWV Tt aft inraTtvovTUV, KCII
Tb)i> eg TSTO a.TrodiSeiyiJ.tvwv TWV TS tyyovwv O.VT& Ttov TroirjTtov drjXovoTi, TMV rt
Xwv oiryr av tKCfzoTe rrpoffTrapaXajBy, jSaXswo/ifvy ^o^y, Kvpia, wg KO.I Tratry
yjpacrta apftravra, fivat. Ib. C. 13. a A. C. 11. n. 13, 14, 15.

uv, f Tt ra

b Ubi supra. c Totouroe ovv

376 Credibility of the Gospel History.

* armies and all the provinces as emperor; but yet did not
' call himself so, though that, with other titles, had been

* given him by a decree.'

(3.) There is a particular fact related of Tiberius by
several historians, said to be done by him when prince,
which yet must have been done before Augustus died.
Pliuy says, that Tiberius was much given to drinking :
4 And that it was thought, that for this reason Lucius Piso

* had been chosen by him to be proefect of Rome, because

* he had continued two days and two nights drinking with
' hirn,d when prince.' Suetonius says; * That Tiberius, in

* his first campaigns, was much reflected on for his excess
' in drinking; and that afterwards, when prince, in the very
4 time of the correction of the public manners, he spent a

* night and two days in eating and drinking with Pompo-
' niiis Flaccus and Lucius Piso; to the former of which he
' gave immediately the province of Syria, and to the other
' the prefecture of the city.'6

It may be worth while to observe with Pagi, that these
two writers, who tell us the story of this drunken bout of
Tiberius, and the consequences of it, seem not to have had
their accounts from one and the same source. They differ
from each other in two or three particulars : one says, that
this piece of excess lasted * two days and two nights;' the
other, * one night and two days.' Pliny mentions jonly the
preferment of Piso ; Suetonius adds that of Flaccus also ;
but they both agree in saying, that Tiberius was * then

* prince,' and Suetonius adds a very particular circumstance
as to the time, that it was during the correction of the pub
lic manners; which may very naturally lead us to what he
had said of the law passed, that Tiberius should govern the
provinces jointly with Augustus, and make the census with
him, one part of which at Rome was the correction of man
ners.

KCti tQ ra e9rt], iravra, OJQ aurofcparwp, ivBvQ a-rro TIJQ NwX^c £7r€<ra\f, [it] \ry<i)v
avroKpciTwp uvaC \];r)(j)io6tv yap avry xai jitera TWV aXXwv ovopciTwv, OVK
thZaTo. Dio. 1. Ivii. p. 602. D.

d — Tribus congiis (uncle et cognomen illi fuit,) epotis uno impetti, spectante
miraculi gratia Tib. principe, in senecta jam severe atque etiam saevo alias,
sed ipsajuventa ad memm pronior fuerat : eaque commendatione credidere
L. Pisonem urbis Romae curse ab eo delectum, quod biduo duabusque nocti-
bus perpotationem continuasset apud ipsunii jam principem. Plin. Nat. Hist,
lib. xiv. cap. 22. e In castris tiro etiam turn, propter

nimiam vini aviditatem, pro Claudio Caldius, pro Nerone Mero vocabatur.
Postea princeps in ipsa publicorum morum correctione cum Pomponio Flacco
et L. Pisone noctem continuumque biduum epulando potandoque consumpsit :
quorum alteri Syriam provinciam, alteri praefecturam urbis confestim detulit.
Suet, in Tib. cap. 42.

Of the fifteenth Year of Tiberius. 377

But we must inquire somewhat more particularly into the
time of this act of intemperance : it may be easily inferred
from Tacitus, who relating the affairs of the year in which
Domitius JEnobarbus and M. Furius Camillas were consuls,
sc. A. U. 785, A. D. 32, says : ' Then Piso had the honour

* of a public funeral by decree of the senate, having" be-

* haved in his office to general satisfaction forf twenty
' years.' If we go back twenty years, we are brought to
the 12th year of the Christian sera, and the 765th of the city,
in which year, according to Tacitus, Piso must have been
praefect of Rome, which is two years before the death of
Augustus.

There are however some objections to this story, which
must be considered before we leave it. Several e learned
men would read in Tacitus X. instead of XX. but to this
Pag'i's reply is sufficient, that this emendation is without the
authority of any manuscripts. It is likewise objected, that
Poinponius Flaccus was not praefect of Syria till long* after
the year of the city 765; consequently, neither was Piso
then made praefecth of Rome. Dr. Pagi' allows very
readily, that Poinponius did not at this time go praefect into
Syria ; but then he gives several instances of men who have
been nominated governors of provinces, who yet never went
into them ; one is .ZElius Lamia, who by this very same em
peror had been nominated praefect of the same province
likewise, namely, of Syria, but yet never went thither. The
fact is taken notice of by k Tacitus and ]Dio; which last
observes, that this was a common practice with Tiberius.
Tacitus has mentioned another like instance in the reign of
Nero. m

Another objection against Piso's being made proefect of

f Dein Piso vigiuti per annos pariter probatus, publico funere ex decreto
senatus celebratus est. Tacit. Ann. 1. vi. cap. 11.

g Lipsius in loc. Noris. Cenot. Pis. Diss. ii. p. 324.

h Sed hoc amplius ex Suetonio colliges, factum Pisonem praefectum, sub
idem tempos quo Pomponius Syriae praetor. Ille autem Syriae non ante an
num 773 praeponi potuit : (Maesiam enim provinciam administrabat, A. 772.
uti ex Tacit, lib. ii. clarum :) non ergo tot annos Piso praefectus urbi. Lipsius
ubi supra ; vid. etiam Norisium ibid. ' A. Chr. 11. n. v.

k Extreme anni [A. U. 786. A. D. 33.] Mors JElii Lamia? funere censorio ce-
lebrata, qui administrandae Syriae imagine tandem exsolutus, urbi praefuerat.
Tacit. Ann. 1. vi. c. 27. ' Toi/rf lluauva TOV iro\iapx°v

Tt\f.vTr](javTa Si]fj,omg, ra<j>y eriprjve, KOI AOVKIOV (legendum Aajuiov, id est, La-
miam) avr avrs ra^iav avQtiktro, bv TrpoTraXat ry <rpartp (legendum 'Zvpuf.
Muretus in Tacit. Ann. vi.) 7rpo<ra£ae Karti-^iv tr 'Pw/iy TOVTO fit Kai tfi trtpwv

TToXXwV 67TOIH, fpyy JU6V, jLtTJ^tVOf dVTUV StOfJieVOQ, \0y^ $£ ^T], Tl^iaV dVTXQ

irpoairoisiJitvoQ. Dio, lib. Iviii. p. 633. D.

m Syria P. Anteio destinata, et variis mox artibus elusus, ad postremum in
urbe retentus est. Tacit. Ann. 1. 13. cap. 22.

378 Credibility of the Gospel History.

the city, A. U. 765, is this : Suetonius says, that this excess
of Tiberius was committed during the public correction of
manners ; by which he has been supposed to refer to Tibe-
rius's being' made censor with Augustus. But cardinal
Noris objects, that the census was not made by Augustus,
A. U. 765, but 767 ; and11 he is of opinion, that the ' public
6 correction of manners,' which Suetonius here speaks of,
intends the edicts which Tiberius published against luxury,
A. U. 775. For my own part, I cannot see but that the
words of Suetonius may very well refer to the time in which
Tiberius was decreed censor with Augustus, which might
be done, A. U. 765 ; though the census was not made, or
at least not finished, till the year 767.

But that this * correction of manners,' which Suetonius
here speaks of, is not that which he has himself mentioned
in another0 place, and which Tacitus says was made, A. U.
775, P may be made evident from two or three passages, not
particularly insisted on by Pagi. Seneca says, that Tibe
rius gave secret directions of importance to Piso, when he
went into Campania, at which time there were divers un
easinesses and discontents in the city.'i This journey of
Tiberius was made in the beginning of the year before that,
in which the edicts were published for the suppressing of
luxury, namely, in the year of the city 774, as appears from
Tacitus. r It is plain therefore, that Piso was prsefect of
Rome in 774, and in the very beginning of it ; and it may
be supposed, that Tiberius had had considerable experience
of Piso's fidelity and ability in that post before that, since
he relied upon him in a very critical conjuncture.

Cardinal Noris objects8 farther : It is true Tiberius had

n Sed Suetonius si censorem Tiberium significaret, annum U. C. 767. desig-
nasset, quo ipsa publicorum morum correctio a censonbus peracta est. Ita-
que designat tempus, quo Tiberius publicis edictis urbano luxui modum pone-
bat, A. U. 775. ibid. p. 324. vid. eund. p. 329. ° In Tib. cap. 34.

p Cains Sulpicius, D. Haterius, consules sequuntur. Inturbidus externis re
bus annus domi suspecta severitate adversum luxum. Ann. lib. iii. cap. 52.

i L. Piso, urbis custos, ebrius, ex quo semel factus est, fuit, majorem partein
noctis in convivio exigebat : usque in horam sextam fere dormiebat : hoc erat
ejus matutinum. Officium taraen suum, quo tutela urbis continebatur, dili-
gentissime administravit. Huic et Divus Augustus dedit secreta mandata, cum
ilium praponeret Thraciae, quam perdorhuit, et Tiberius proficiscens in Cam-
paniam, cum multa in urbe et suspecta relinqueret et invisa. Seneca, ep. 83.

r Sequitur Tiberii quartus, Drusi secundus consulatus. Ejus anni principle
Tiberius, quasi firmandae valetudini, in Campaniam concessit : longam et
continuam absentiam paulatim meditans. Tacit. Ann. lib. iii. cap. 31.

s His acced it, Tiberium in provinciisbiennio ante mortem Augusti imperium
obtinuisse; intra urbem vero non habuisse, nisi jus intercedendi ob tnbuni-
ciam potestatem. Quare unus Augustus urbis prsefecti designandi potestatem
habebat. Noris. ibid, p. 324.

Of the fifteenth Year of Tiberius. 379

proconsular power in the provinces two years before Au
gustus's death : all the authority he had in the city was
owing1 to his tribunician power, but that included only a
right of interceding or forbidding, but could not give the
power of appointing a prcefect.

I think it is undoubted, that Tiberius might call the se
nate by virtue of the tribunician power,1 and it is likely do
several other things : but there is no need of contending
about this point. Perhaps Tiberius did not nominate and
appoint Piso prsefect of the city ; he might however recom
mend him so effectually to Augustus, his colleague, that he
might appoint him. Pagi observes, that Pliny, speaking of
this matter, uses the word choosing, not appointing.11

I imagine, that this fact is now cleared up and vindicated
against the several objections which have been made to it ;
and that Piso was appointed or chosen to be proefect of the
city of Rome by Tiberius, ' then prince,' two years before
the death of Augustus, namely, in A. U. 765.

But before 1 quite leave this story, I would strengthen
the argument founded upon it by a remark or two upon the
title of prince, given here to Tiberius by Pliny and Sueto
nius.

It is well known, that prince was the soft title which
Augustus chose, rather than that of v king or dictator. This
title therefore, when used absolutely, is equivalent to em
peror : and Dio says, that Tiberius had the title of em
peror given him by a decree before Augustus died, as has
been observed already. Moreover this title of emperor is
frequently given by Roman and Greek authors to Titus and
Trajan, on account of their tribunician and proconsular
power which they enjoyed, the former in the lifetime of his
father Vespasian, the latter of Nerva. Pagi thinks, this
title of emperor which was given to these colleag'ues in the
empire, was founded particularly on the perpetual procon
sular power in all the provinces. w But, however that be,
it is certain they are often called emperors. Josephus, in
his description of Vespasian's and Titus's triumph at Rome,

1 Vid. Usser. Ann. A. M. 4015 et 4017. u Eaque com-

mendatione credidere L. Pisonem urbis Romae curae ab eo delectum. Vid.
Pagi, Critic, ad An. Ch. 11. n. 4.

v Qui cuncta discordiis civilibus fessa, nomine principis, sub imperium ac-
cepit. Tacit. Ann. lib. i. cap. 1. Non regno tamen neque dictatura, sed
principis nomine constitutam rempublicam. Id. ibid. cap. 9.

w Titus enim, quemadmodmn et ante eum Tiberius, ac post eum Trajanus,
imperii collega fait, ideoque imperatoris titulo exornatus. Imperii collegee
tribunicia potestate et imperio proconsulari donabantur, ratione cujus impera-
tores nuncupati. Pagi, A. D. 71. n. 3. in Crit. ad Bar.

380 Credibility of the Gospel History.

after the Jewish war, says, That thex emperors lodged the
night before near the temple of Isis. Pliny the elder, in his
dedication of his Natural History to Titus, written before
the death of Vespasian, calls Titus emperor^ more than
once. Philostratus says, that Titus was declared emperor
at Rome, and admitted to equal power in the government2
with his father. It is in vain therefore to say, that Titus
was called emperor in his father's lifetime, purely on ac
count of his having been saluted emperor by his soldiers in
the camp, or in the sense in which this word was used
under the commonwealth ; since Philostratus says, he was
declared emperor at Rome; moreover Capitolinusa calls
Vespasian and Titus princes without any distinction. All
these passages thus laid together may satisfy us, that prince
and emperor are equivalent in these writers ; and that Tibe
rius had a right to the title of prince, even during the life
time of August us, after he was made his colleague in the
empire. I shall refer the reader to but one passage more,
in which Pliny the younger assures us, that Trajan was
declared emperorb by Nerva in his lifetime; and it seems
very strongly to support Pagi's opinion, that the title of
emperor given to these colleagues was founded rather on
their proconsular empire than their triburiician power.

(4.) There are two or three verses of Dionysius the geo
grapher, which Pag'i esteems a very remarkable testimony
to the proconsular empire of Tiberius.0 It appears from
the two last of these verses, that in Dionysius's time Rome
was governed by more than one prince. It has been ques-

x E/cft yap avsTravovTO rr]Q VVKTOQ (KeivtjQ ol avroKparopeg' Joseph, de Bell.
lib. vii. cap. 5. p. 1305. v. 2.

y Jucundissime imperator — Sciantque omnes quam ex aequo tecum vivat
imperium. Triumphalis et censorius tu, sexiesque consul, ac tribuniciae potes-
tatis particeps. Plm. in Praefat. z AvapprjOttQ KOI avToicpaTwp

ev ry 'P(t)fiyr KO.I api^fiwv a^iwOfig T&TW, airr)ii ptv itrojuoipTjo-wv TYIQ ap^jg r^>
Trarpt' K. r. X. Cumque imperator Roma? esset appellatus, omnibus ornatus
dignitatibus, Romam iter ingressus, ut patris collega fieret. Philost. Vit. Apol-
lonii, lib. vi. cap. 30. p. 269. Lipsiae, 1709. a Avus Annius

Rufus, item consul et praefectus urbi adscitus in patricios a principibus Ves-
pasianio et Tito censonbus. In Marc. Antonin. Philos.

b Simul filius, simul Caesar, mox IMPERATOR, et consors tribuniciae
potestatis, et omnia pariter et statim factus es, quae proxime parens verus tan-
turn in alterum filium contulit. Plin. Paneg. c. 8.

c EK Aiof A.vaovir}tQ ati p,tya KOipavtovTtt;, V. 78.

A Jove Ausonii semper longe lateque dominantes.

A 'PtojjiijV TipriiGGav, 6/iwv fityav OIKOV avctKT(i)V, 355.

Mfjrtpa Tratrawv TroXtwv, uipvetov tfit9\ov> 356.

De amne Tiberi loquitur ; aitque, Qui amabilem secat in duas partes Romam,
Romam honorabilem : meorum magnam domum Principum vel Dominorum.
Dionys. Orbis Descript.

Of the fifteenth Year of Tiberius. 381

tioned indeed when Dionysius lived, and who are those
princes he speaks of; some have thought they were the two
Antonines, others have thought he intended Severus, Cara-
calla, and Geta. Cardinal*1 Noris, 1 think, hath put it be
yond all doubt, by a passage alleged from6 Pliny, that
Dionysius lived in the time of Augustus : the cardinal
indeed supposes, that the princes here referred to are Caius
and Lucius Caesar, Augustus's adopted sons. Pagi seems
to me to have shown, that the title of ai/a/cre? cannot belong
to them ; and that Augustus and Tiberius are the princes
which Dionysius means : but for the particulars I must
refer the reader to Pagi himself/

(5.) There were two different computations of Tiberitis's
reign in the time of St. Clement of Alexandria : for having
first said, that Augustus reigned forty-three years, and
Tiberius twenty-two, £ he adds : * But some reckon the

* reigns of the Roman emperors thus. — Augustus reigned

* forty-six years, four months, and one day. Then Tiberius,
' twenty-six years, six months,11 nineteen days.'

Having laid before the reader the chief arguments that
have been produced for the proconsular, or joint empire of
Tiberius with Augustus, I will consider also some of the
objections which there are against this opinion.

1. It is objected, that Spartian says, that Marcus Aurelius
and Lucius Verus1 were the two first Augusti that governed
the Roman empire together. But to this it is answered,
that none of the patrons of this opinion ever said, that Tibe
rius had the title of Augustus whilst Augustus lived, but
only that he was colleague with him in the empire. These
words of Spartian are no more an objection against Tibe-
rius's proconsular empire, than they are against Titus's and
Trajan's; who certainly enjoyed this honour, the one with
his father Vespasian, and the other with Nerva.

Nor indeed did the title of Augustus give any new pow
er; it was only a title of honour, K which sort of titles were

d Cenot. Pis. Diss. 2. p. 193. e Hoc in loco [Arabia

nempe] genitum esse Dionysium,terrarum orbis situs recent issimum auctorem,
quern ad commentanda omnia in orientem praemisit Divus Augustus, ituro in
Armenian! ad Parthicas Arabicasque res majore n'lio. Plin. Hist. Nat. lib. vi.
cap. 27. f Critica in Baron. A. D. 11. n. 6, 7.

g Avys^oQ err) rtaaapaKovra Tpia' Ti/3«pio£, (rrj K/3. Clem. Strom. 1. i. p.
339. A Parisiis, 1629. h Tiveg piv rot TSQ xporsg TWV

Puijuaucwv (3a<n\£wv OVTWQ avaypa^ytrt. — Avyu<zo<; tfiaoiXtvcrev ertf /*T, [Jti]va£
d, fiptpav niav. E-TrtiTa Ttpepioe, trr) KT, jujjvaf <r, rjfifpaQ i9. Id. ib. C.

1 Hi sunt qui postea duo pahter Augusti, primi rempublicam gubernaverunt.
Spartian. in Hadrian, cap. 24. Vid. Eutrop. lib. viii. cap. 9. et Capitolin. in
Marc. cap. 7. * Vid. Dio. lib. liii. p. 507.

382 Credibility of the Gospel History.

usually taken gradually. Tiberius ever refused that of
father of his country, and would not permit that of Augus
tus to be given him by any decree, though he accepted of
it from some persons, and made use of it himself in letters
to1 foreign princes. And Dio takes notice of it as a singu
larity in Caligula, that in one day he accepted all those
titles which Augustus had received throughout his long'
reign, and had suffered to be given him only one by one,
(some of which Tiberius never would accept of,) except
only that of father of his country, which he took upon him
also in a short time after.™

2dly, It is objected : If Tiberius had been made col
league in the empire with Augustus, there could have been
no reason for those fears about the succession of Tiberius
which Livia showed upon the death" of Augustus; nor
would Tiberius have hesitated to accept the empire when
offered to him by the senate : or indeed, what occasion
could there have been for any new investiture at all?

But to this, I think, it is easy to answer; that it is no
surprising thing that Livia should be under some pain,
when the settlement of her son in the empire was at stake.
Though Tiberius had been partner in the empire, yet cer
tainly the death of Augustus made a great change. Ger-
manicus was very popular, and at the head of a numerous
army :° and as for Tiberius's hesitation, he had been hitherto
but partner in the empire, and some kind of new inves
titure was needful. It is true, he carried his dissimulation
very far ; but Augustus himself never renewed a fresh term
-of government, (which he did several times,) but with much
difficulty ; and not till he had been overcome by importu
nity, and the consideration of the necessity of affairs.

However, this dissimulation of Tiberius has afforded a
new proof, that he had been colleague with Augustus : for
as Tacitus and Dio intimate very plainly the fears which
Tiberius had of Germanicus, so Suetonius says : * He pre-
* tended a bad state of health, that Germanicus might
-' entertain hopes of a speedy succession, or at least? a part-

1 To TS TS TrarpOQ rr,Q Trarpi^of Trpocrpjj^ta TravrtXwQ ^ifwo'arw, Kai TO TH
Auy«<ra SK £~t9ero fitv (sde yap -^rj^KrQijvai wore fiao-f ) Xtyo/ifvov 5' CIKSUV, Kai

avayivwaKwv, ((peps' Kai oua/cif yf (SaaiXfvai TIGIV fTTfrtXXf, /cat
7rpo<rcv£ypa0£. Dio. lib. Ivii. p. 607. A.

<ra vys^og tv
oi idt'£ctTo wv ivia

Xafiiiv, K. T. X. Dio. lib. lix, p. 641. D.

Acnbus namque custodiis domum et vias sepserat Livia. Tacit. Ann. lib.
i. cap. 5. ° Tacit. Ann. lib. h cap. 33—35.

Dio. lib. Ivii. p. 603. p Simulavit et valetudinem, quo

Of tltc fifteenth Year of Tiberius. 383

nersbip in the empire.' But such an expectation had been
ridiculous in Germanicus, and this pretence of Tiberius
could never have had the effect he designed, if no one had
been partner in the empire before.

3. But the chief objection against the supposition, that
St. Luke has computed the reign of Tiberius from the time
of his proconsular empire, seems to be this ; That it does
not appear that any writers have computed the reign of
those who were colleagues in the empire by the epoch of
their proconsular empire, and that in particular there are no
traces of this computation of Tiberius's reign. 1

To this I answer : There is reason to think, that people
did often compute according to the epoch of the procon
sular empire. Pagi mentions a medal which has this in
scription : ' In the xi. new sacred year of the emperor Titus
1 Ceesar r Vespasian Augustus.' Now Titus reigned alone
after his father's death but a little above two years.

It will not be expected I should here attempt to explain
the meaning of the epoch of the new sacred year. All that
I shall observe is, that it appears not to have been used
upon the coins of any emperors beside those of Vespasian,
Titus, Domitian, and Nerva : and that it does not begin at
any one common period, such as the building or dedication
of any one particular temple, but that the numbers answer
exactly to the years of the several emperors on whose coins
it is found.8 And Pagi is of opinion, that it was an epoch
chiefly used by the people of Syria and Egypt, because the
epithet * sacred' is more common upon their coins than any
others.1

And I cannot but think, that there were for some time
different computations of the length of Nerva's and Trajan's
reigns ; and that they were owing to this, that Trajan was

aaquiore animo Germanicus celerem successionem vel certe societatem princi-
patus operiretur. Suet, in Tiber, cap. 25.

q Est autem inauditum in omni memoria, Titi annos ab alio initio fuisse de-
ductos quam a morte Vespasiani. S. Basnage, Annal. Pol. Eccles. A. D. 11.
n. iv. r Sic in numino Graeco apudOcconem, p. 166.

legitur AYT. TITOY. KAISAPOS. OYE2IIASIANOY. 2EB. ETOYS. IEPOS.
I A. id. est, Imperatoris Titi Caesaris Vespasiani Augusti anno novo sacro xi.
Quo ex Titi nummo manifeste apparet, deceptos viros erudites qui negant
annos Tiberii, Titi, aliorumque imperii collegarum numerates fuisse. Haec
porro epocha non nisi in Vespasiani, Titi, Domitiani, et Nervae nummis oc-
currit. Pagi, Crit. in Baron. A. D. 81. n. iii.

s Nisi enim hoc modo in nummis Titi, Domitiani, et Nervae, epocha haec
explicetur, impossibile est nummos inter se posse convenire ; cum eorum im
perii annos non excedat, sed ad amussim iis respondeat. Pagi, ibid.

1 Et nullibi sacri nomen frequentius, quam in nummis in Syria et Egypto
percussis, usurpatum. Ibid. n. iv*

384 Credibility of the Gospel History.

for some time Nerva's colleague in the empire. Mr. Dod-
wellu was of opinion, that Nerva did actually resign the
empire to Trajan before his death: and sovAurelius Victor
and w Lactantius seern to say. 1 think indeed that Nerva
did not resign, not only because Eutropiusx says, that Dio-
clesian was the first of all the Roman emperors that did so,
but especially because the younger Pliny, who served
under Nerva and Trajan, and knew them both very well,
says nothing of it, though he often mentions^ their joint
empire. But T think, that the notion which the fore-men
tioned authors had of Nerva's resigning, may be very well
accounted for upon the supposition, that they had met with
different computations of the time of these two princes'
reigns in some ancient writers ; and their mistake is not easy
to be accounted for otherwise.

As for Tiberius, I take it for granted that it has been fully
proved, that he was for some time partner in the empire
with Augustus; and particularly that it has been made ap
pear, that Piso was praefect of Rome twenty years, and that
lie was put into that post by the appointment or procure
ment of Tiberius. Thus much 1 think Basnage allows,2
and Suetonius and Pliny both say that Tiberius was * then
* prince.'

And it is highly probable that the Christians had a persua
sion, that there were two different epochs of the beginning
of Tiberius's reign : otherwise, when they said that Jesus
was crucified in the fifteenth year of Tiberius, when the two
Gemini were consuls, namely, A. D. 29, (as they did almost
universally,) after he had preached abovea two years, or

u Vid. Append, ad Dissert. Cypr. n. 39, 40. v Quid enim Nerva

prudentius? — Qui cum extrema setate apud Sequanos, quo tyranni defecit metu,
imperium arbitrio legionum cepisset ; ubi prospexit, nisi a superioribus robus-
tionbusque corpore animoque geri non posse, mense sexto ac decimo semet eo
abdicavit. Aurel. Viet, de Caesar, in Nerva.

w Sim ul et exemplum Nervae proferebat, qui imperium Trajano tradidisset.
De Mort. Persecut. cap. 18. x Diocletianus privatus

in villa quae baud procul a Salonis est, praeclaro otio sennit ; inusitata virtute
usus ; ut solus omnium post conditum Romanum imperium ex tanto fastigio
sponte ad privates vitae statum civilitatemque remearet. Eutrop. lib. ix. cap.
28. y Assumptus es in laborum curarumque consortium.

Plin. Paneg. cap. 7. Inde quasi deposito imperioqua securitate, qua gloria
laetus? (Nerva nempe) Nam quantulum refert, deponas an partiaris imperium,
nisi quod difficilius hoc est ? ib. c. 8. Magnum hoc tuae moderationis indi
cium, quod non solum successor imperii, sed particcps etiam sociusque
placuisti. cap. 9. z Ubi supra, A. D. 1 1 . n. ii.

a Tricesimo enim juxta evangelistam Lucam anno aetatis suse ccepit in carne
Dominus evangelium praedicare; et juxta Johannem evangelistam, per tria
paschata duos postea implevit annos : et inde sex Tiberii supputantur anni, &c.

Of the fifteenth Tear of Tiberius. 385

ab whole year including two passovers, or a year and somec
few months ; they must have been sensible that they con
tradicted St. Luke, who says, that the " word of God came"
to John the Baptist in the " fifteenth year of Tiberius ;"
since also they must necessarily have allowed some time for
the ministry of John, distinct from that of Jesus.

That we have so few examples of this way of computing*
the reign of Tiberius, is not to be wondered, considering
how few ancient writers who lived near his time are come
down to us, and especially such as lived in the provinces
where this epoch must have been chiefly used. The dis
tinct computation of Augustus's reign to the time of his
death, and of Tiberius's after him, was undoubtedly most
commodious; and for this reason, probably, the computation
of Tiberius's reign, from the time of his proconsular empire,
was soon dropped. Besides, Tiberius seems to have taken
pains to obliterate this date of his government, inasmuch as
lie was unwilling to have it thought that he owed his great
ness to the adoption of Augustus, or the intrigues of his
mother Livia ; but would have it ascribed solely to the free
choice of the people after Augustus's death, d that is, to his
own merit, as Dio expressly says.6

Tiberius then having had, for some time before the death
of Augustus, equal power with him in all the provinces and
armies, and having been made thereby partner with him in
the empire, it is not impossible, but that St. Luke might
compute the reign of Tiberius by this epoch.

We should now, if possible, settle the exact time when
Tiberius was made partner with Augustus ; it may be con
cluded that he was so, A. U. 765, two years before Augus
tus died, because in that year Piso was made prsefect of
Rome, Tiberius being prince : and Archbishop Usher and
Prideaux place the beginning of this government of Tibe
rius in this year.

There is however a considerable difficulty attending this

Appollinarius Laodic. apud Hieron. Com. in Dan. cap. 9. 'O de
Ty I»j<78 afc Tpia SitTpityev trrj. Orig. corit. Gels. 1. ii. p. 67.

sv trn Tifiepm, feat 7r£jT£/cai$£Kar<£> Avysors* ourw ir
TO. TpiaKovTa ITT} tug ov tTTaQtv. Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. i. p. 340. A.

c Evtaurov yap TTS Kai fjirjva^ oXiysg edi§a£tv' Orig. Phil. p. 4.

d Dabat et famae, ut vocatus electusque potius a republica videretur, quam
per uxorium ambitum et senilem adoptionem irrepsisse. Tacit. Ann. 1. i c. 8.

e USr] nev yap r]Ks<ra on tirtiftav r) Aisia O.KOVTOQ TH Avya^s ri\v
avT<j} TTtpnrtTroitjKtvcu €\£y«ro, £7r\arrtv OTTWQ nrj Trap1 eiceivrjg, a\Xa Trapa
flxXijQ avajKa^oQ wg Kat Kara apmjv atyuv TrporjKwv, 8o%titi' avrniv
Dio. 1. Ivii. p. 603. D.

VOL. I. 2 C

386 Credibility of the Gospel History.

matter, because Velleius and Suetonius differ about the time
in which the law was passed by the senate, decreeing Tibe
rius equal power with Augustus in the provinces and armies.
According to Suetonius this law was not passed till after
Tiberius's triumph, which certainly happened A. U. 765, A.
D. 12. But according to Velleiusf this law was passed at
the desire of Augustus, before Tiberius returned to Rome
from Germany to make his triumph. Pagig is inclined to
prefer the testimony of Velleius Paterculus before that of
Suetonius, because Velleius was contemporary with Tibe
rius ; but yet he dares not be positive in this matter, be
cause St. Clements's numbers are different from both.
However, as Tiberius was consul in the 21st and 31st years
of our Lord, he judges this piece of respect to the 10th and
20th years from the llth year of our Lord, toh be a con
firmation of the supposition, that Tiberius's proconsular
power commenced, A. D. 11. He observes also marks of
honour shown to the Quinquennals of this epoch, such as
the dedication of temples by himself, or the people of pro
vinces, the founding of cities by dependent princes, and
such other the like things, with which the Quinquennals and
Decennals, that is, the fifth and tenth years of remarkable
events, were wont to be celebrated.

As he thinks it most probable, that Tiberius's procon
sular empire began, A. U, 764, A. D. 11; so he is pretty
well satisfied as to the month and day of the month, which
he thinks was the 28th of August, or the fifth of the Ka
lends of September. One reason for it is, that from the
725th year of the city, Augustus seems to have had a par
ticular respect for the 5th of the Kalends of months.
Moreover according to the second computation, which Cle
mens Alexandrinus mentions of the reign of Tiberius, it
must have begun on the 28th of August. St. Clement says,
that Tiberius reigned twenty-six years, six months, and
nineteen days. Now Tiberius died the 16th of March, A.
D. 37, from the 28th of August, A. D. 10, to the 16th of
March, A. D. 37, are exactly, (according to Dr. PagPs
reckoning,) so many years, months, and days, as St. Cle
ment mentions. So that though St. Clement has been in

f Sueton. in Tiber, c. 21, 22. Velleius, Pat. 1. ii. c. 121. Their words are
transcribed above, p. 374. « Vid. Crit. A. Ch. 11. n. 10.

h Quia tamen Tiberius anno Christi xxi. rursusque anno Christi xxxi. con
sul processit, existimandum, utrumque consulatum ob decennalia et vicennalia
iinperii proconsularis Tiberii gestum, ideoque et ilium anno Christi xi. imperio
proconsulari donatum : quamquam uterque consulatus anno Christi xii. quo
reni actam narrat Suetonius, respondere etiam possit, etiamsi quinquennalia
Icgitimo tempore celebrata fuerint. id. ib.

Of the fifteenth Year of Tiberius. 387

the wrong as to the year, since he begins this computation
of Tiberius's reign, A. D. 10, yet he has helped us to the
month and day of the month on which it commenced.1

I have represented Pagi's sense of this matter, as well as
I can, in a few words ; but I cannot say, that this reasoning*
is altogether convincing. I must acknowledge, I see not
how any argument can be drawn from St. Clement's testi
mony, either for the year or month of this epoch ; if his
numbers have been altered, as Pagi allows they have in
many places, and particularly in this very passage.

There appears to me some weight in his observation upon
the Quinquennals and Decennals of this epoch ; but yet it
is not fully conclusive : there might be some other reason,
beside that here supposed, for Tiberius's taking the consul
ship, A. D. 21, and 31. The 22d and 26th years of the
Christian oera are as remarkable as any other for the found
ing of cities, dedicating temples, and erecting of monuments.
Though indeed, if this epoch began in the middle of any
year, it is obvious at first sight, that these honours may be
divided betwixt two years.

And perhaps Velleius Paterculus and Suetonius may be
reconciled by supposing only, that there was some time
between Augustus's proposing Tiberius's partnership with
him to the senate, and the passing of the act.

Upon the whole, I think there is good reason to believe,
that Tiberius was colleague in the empire with Augustus;
and that this epoch of Tiberius's empire was followed for
some time by some persons, in the provinces at least ; but
it appears to me uncertain, when this proconsular empire
began, whether about two years, or about three years before
Augustus died.

Let us, however, adjust the numbers in St. Luke to this
computation of the reign of Tiberius, which commenced
either about two years, or about three years before his em
pire after the death of Augustus. And we will have an
eye to the two dates of our Saviour's nativity above men
tioned, namely, September or October, A. U. 748, and 749.

If Tiberius's proconsular empire began about three years
before Augustus died, on the 28th of Aug. A. U. 764, A.
D. 11, then this 15th of Tiberius's reign (according to this
computation of it) began Aug. 28th, A. U. 778, A. D. 25.
Supposing that John the Baptist began his ministry No
vember following, in the same year, and that Jesus was bap-

' Quare Clemens Alexandrinus rei gestae diem nobis conservavit : sed numeri
annorum corrupt!, quod in eo auctore non infrequens. Pagi, Critic. A. D. 1 1.
n. ix.

2 c2

388 Credibility of the Gospel History.

tized by him the 6th of January following-, in A. U. 779, A.
D. 26 ; then upon the supposition that Jesus was born in
September, A. U. 748, he would be at his baptism thirty
years of age and some months over.

If Tiberius's proconsular empire commenced about two
years before the death of Augustus, in A. U. 765, A. D.
12, then the fifteenth of the reign of Tiberius began in
A. U. 779, A. D. 26. And supposing that John the Baptist
began his ministry in November of that year, and that Jesus
was baptized by him the 6th of January following, A. U.
780, A. D. 27, then, upon the supposition that Jesus was
born in September, A. U. 749, he would be at the time of
his baptism thirty years of age and some months over ; or,
if born A. U. 748, he would be somewhat more than thirty-
one years of age.

We will put this matter one way more. If John the
Baptist began his ministry in the fifteenth of Tiberius, A. U.
778, A. D. 25, (as in the first stating of this question,) but
did not baptize Jesus till the sixth of January, A. U. 780,
A. D. 27, after he had preached somewhat above a year,
then Jesus would be at his baptism thirty years of age and
odd months, if he was born A. U. 749; thirty-one years of
age and some odd months, if born the latter end of the year
748.

I see not, but that we have a very good right to take
those dates of these events, which appear most favourable to
St. Luke; since it is not absolutely certain, when Herod
died, or when Tiberius's proconsular empire began : nor
have any of the writers of harmonies determined, that I
know of, beyond contradiction, the space of time between
the commencement of John the Baptist's ministry and our
Saviour's baptism. But if we allow on each hand the dates
the least favourable to St. Luke's numbers, namely, that
Jesus was born A. U. 748, and that he was not baptized till
January, A. U. 780, A. D. 27; yet even then Jesus would
be little more (as has been shown) than thirty-one years of
age ; at which time a person may be said very properly to
be " about thirty years of age," as will appear by and by.

I imagine I have now showed, that there is nothing im
probable in the supposition, that St. Luke computed the
reign of Tiberius, not from his sole empire after the death
of Augustus, but from the time of his proconsular empire,
when he had equal power with Augustus given him in all
the provinces and armies; and that upon this supposition,
there lies no objection against the age ascribed to Jesus at
his baptism.

Of the fifteenth Year of Tiberius. 389

III. However, in order to complete this solution of this
difficulty, it will be proper to consider some other notes of
time, which we find in the evangelists; and to inquire,
whether these likewise agree with this supposition.

St. Luke says, " Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of
Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judea, —
the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias,"
Luke iii. 1, 2.

It has been the opinion of some learned men. that Pilate
did not come into Judea so soon as the fifteenth year of Ti-
berius's proconsular empire, the 12th of his sole empire, A.
U. 778, A. D. 25.

That every one may judge of this matter, I shall set
down the account Josephus has given of Pilate's leaving
Judea ; from which we shall be able to conclude when he
came into it.

The senate of the Samaritans sent complaints against
Pilate to Vitellius, president of Syria. And Josephus says :

* Vitellius, sending his friend Marcellus to administer the
' affairs of Judea, commanded Pilate to go to Rome, to an-
' swer to the emperor for those things of which he was ac-
' cused by the Jews. And Pilate, having spent ten years in
6 Judea, hastened away to Rome, in obedience to the com-

* mands of Vitellius, not daring to refuse. But before he
' got to Rome, Tiberius was dead.

* Moreover Vitellius came into Judea, and went up to
' Jerusalem. It was then a feast time ; the feast is called
4 the passover. Vitellius being received there with great

* magnificence, abolished entirely the tax upon vendible
' fruits, and granted to the priests the right of keeping in the
' temple the vestment of the high-priest and all its orna-

* ments, as they had done formerly, — Having conferred
' these favours upon the nation, he also took away the

* priesthood from the high-priest Joseph, who is likewise
' called Caiaphas, and substituted in his room Jonathan, the

* son of Ananus the high-priest, and then returned to An-
« tioch.'k

k Kort OuirfXXtof. MorpfceXXov TOV nvTS QiXov £/C7T6/n//flf ETajueXjjrJjv TOIQ I«-
ytvr]aoiif.vov, IIiXctTOV ticeXtvaev STTI 'PwjU7j£ cnrtevcu, TTOOQ a KaTrjyopoiev
oi SidaZavra TOV avTOKparopa' Kai TIiXaroQ, deica eTtffiv diaTpi-^aQ tin Iy-
, ttQ 'Pwprjv STmytro, TCCIQ OwtXXis 7rnOofj,evog evroXaig, UK ov avrenrtiV
irpiv Se r] ry 'Pwjwy Trpoff^ftv aurov, (j)9avei Ti/3£pto£ [leTa^ag. OviTe\\iog 8e EIQ
TTJV InSatav afyiKontvoQ, cm 'IspoaoXv/jioJv avyst, Kai rjv avroiQ ioprrj, flac^a Se
KuXfirai' Se%9tiQ §e /i£yaXo7rp£7raj£ OmreXXtog, ra TiXrj TWV
&.vir\<nv tiq TO irav TOIQ TCIVTTJV KciTOiKSffi, icai ri\v <roXj;v r«

O.VTS /cocr/ioj/ ffvv£x<i)ar)<rtv ev TQ ispy Kfifttvov VTTO TOIQ eptvaiv txeiv Tr)v
fTrtfjieXeiav, KaQon Kai Trporepov qv OVTOIQ t%zaia.' fe. r. X. Joseph. Antiq. lib
xviii. cap. 5. sect. 2, 3. p. 801, 802.

390 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Josephus immediately after this says, that Tiberius sent
orders to Vitellius, to go and make a league with the king'
of the Parthians ; that Vitellius having had a meeting with
the king at the river Euphrates, and executed his commis
sion, returned again to Antioch.'1

After this, Vitellius received orders from Tiberius to go
and make war with Aretas king of Petra.

' Vitellius then, having got all things ready for the war
with Aretas, hastened away for Petra with two legions, and
other auxiliary forces, and was come as far as Ptolemais.
But as he was about to march his army through Judea, the
chief men met him, entreating him not to go through their
country. — — He complied with their request: and having
ordered his army to take their route through the great
plain, he himself, with Herod the tetrarch and their
friends, went up to Jerusalem, to worship God, a feast of
the Jews being at hand.m He was received by the peo
ple of the Jews with great respect. Having been there
three days, he took away the high-priesthood from Jona
than, and gave it to his brother Theophilus : and on the
fourth day after his arrival, receiving letters which brought
' him an account of the death of Tiberius, he took an oath
' of the people to Caius.'n

A few remarks on this account will suffice.
It is not expressly said, which feast of the Jews the last
mentioned feast was; but there can be no doubt, but that
it was the passover, A. D. 37. I think this is not contested
by any one. Tiberius died the 16th of March, A. D. 37 :
the news of his death might easily reach Judea by the pass-
over of that year, and could not be retarded to the feast of
Pentecost.

The passover, first mentioned in this account, must have
been the passover, A. D. 36. It is evident, that the sum
mer following*, Vitellius went as far as the river Euphrates,
and returned to Antioch ; and the next spring he was to go
and make war with Aretas : but whilst his troops marched
towards Petra, he went up to Jerusalem at the passover in
the year thirty-seven, as has been observed. Nothing can
be plainer, 1 think, then, that Pilate was removed before the
passover in thirty-six ; and must have been out some time
before: Vitellius did not go to Jerusalem immediately after
he had sent away Pilate, but first ordered his friend Mar
cel lus to take care of affairs there.

It is not said here, how long Pilate had been out, before

1 Id. ibid. p. 802, 803. m Eopr»7£ Trarpts roi£

n Id. ibid. cap. 6. sect. 3.

Of the fifteenth Year of Tiberius. 391

Vitellius went up to Jerusalem ; but it is probable, it was
half a year. This may be concluded from hence ; Josephus
says, that Vitellius, when he was at Jerusalem, the first
time here spoken of, put the high-priest's vestment into the
priests' hands, to be kept by them in the temple. Josephus
is very express, that this favour was conferred by Vitellius
upon the nation at this time, and that having- done so, he
put out Caiaphas, and returned to Antioch. Now in another
place Josephus says : * This vestment king Herod0 kept

* here [in the castle of Antonia]. And after his death it was

* kept in the same place by the Romans till the time of Ti-
' berius Caesar. In his reign Vitellius president of Syria,
' having come to Jerusalem, and the people receiving him
' in a very honourable manner, he being willing to make

* them a suitable return, since they had desired that the
' sacred vestment might be in their own custody, wrote to
' Tiberius Csesar about it, and he granted their request.'
From this passage it appears, that Vitellius did not put the
high priest's vestment into the hands of the Jews without
leave from Tiberius. If Vitellius actually made this grant
when he was at Jerusalem at the passover, A. D. thirty-six,
(as Josephus says expressly in the first passage,) it is likely
the Jews had sent their request to him about the time that
Pilate was removed. And considering the slowness of
Tiberius in all his proceedings, it will not be thought
strange, that we allow half a year between the Jews' pre
senting their request to Vitellius in Syria, and the return of
an answer from the emperor ; it is rather surprising it should
have come back so soon.

It is possible, that some may except against this argu
ment, and say, that the grant was not made by Vitellius
when he was at Jerusalem ; but that he there received the
Jews' request, then wrote to Tiberius, and some time after
this put the sacred vestment into their custody. But though
Josephus does in this last passage seem to place things in
this order, yet I should think, that since, in the passage first
cited, he says Vitellius bestowed this favour upon the Jews
whilst at Jerusalem at that time ; it may be inferred, that
the petition had been presented to him whilst in Syria, and
that he brought Tiberius's grant to Jerusalem with him.

0 Tavrrjv 6 fiamXtvQ 'KovSrjQ t$v\a"tv iv T ,•; roiry, icai fji'-ra rrjv ttceivn r£~
\tvrr]V VTTO 'Pcjfiaiotg rjv, )Uf%pt TOJI/ Ti/3epi8 Kat<rapo£ xpovwv' nri rsra £f Ow-
TtXXtog 6 Tt]Q Svpiae riysfjiuv, CTri^/njffag TOIQ 'itpovoXvpoig, dt£afAtva TS irXr]-
QSQ O.VTOV Xafjnrporara TTUVV, StXwv O.VT&Q Tr]Q evTroit'ag ajtm^/a<70at, €7m
•rrapeicaXeffav ri}v iepav ToXrjv VTTO TIJV avruv t^saiav t^iv, 6yp«i//c Trtpe TKTMV
Kai<rapr, K^fcfivof £7r«rp£v|/f. Ant. lib. xv. cap. 11. sect. 4.

392 Credibility of the Gospel History.

However, though this argument should not be allowed
me, yet since upon Pilate's removal Marcellus was sent to
govern in Judea, it is plain there was some time between
Vitellius's issuing his orders to Pilate to go to Rome, and
his own journey to Jerusalem. This time might be the
space of five or six months; and I apprehend that the pro
bability at least of my reasoning above, that Vitellius re
ceived the Jews' petition for keeping the high-priest's
vestment in Syria, then wrote to Tiberius, and delivered it
to them when he was at Jerusalem, may very much dispose
us to admit the supposition of this space.

And though it should be thought, that at the passover
next after Pilate's removal, Vitellius did not give the high-
priest's vestment into the Jewish hands, but only received
their petition for that favour : yet this does fully overthrow
the opinion of those, who have thought, that Pilate was re
moved but a few weeks before the death of Tiberius. Vi
tellius, after the removal of Pilate, was at Jerusalem at a
passover; and having been magnificently received by the
Jews, in requital of their civilities wrote to Tiberius, (so we
will suppose at present,) that they might have the keeping
of the hig'h-priest's garment, and Tiberius granted it. This
passover then was not that passover at which Vitellius,
being at Jerusalem, heard of the death of Tiberius. We
are therefore fully assured, that the passover which followed
the removal of Pilate, was not the passover, A. D, 37,
before which Tiberius died, but the passover preceding,
namely, that in A. D. 36.

It is certain then, that Pilate was removed before the
passover, A. D. 36; and probable, that he was removed
about five or six months before it ; about September or Oc
tober, A. D. 35, about a year and a half before the death of
Tiberius.

Since Josephus says, that Pilate spent ten years in Judea,
he came thither about October, A. D. 25, or at least before
the passover, A. D. 26, in the twelfth year of Tiberius's sole
empire, which twelfth year began the nineteenth of August,
A. D. 25. This also is perfectly consistent with what Jo
sephus says of Valerius Gratus, the first procurator of Judea
under Tiberius ; ' that he spent eleven years in Judea, and
' was then succeeded by Pontius Pilate.'P

So that though we should suppose that Tiberius's pro
consular empire began three years before the death of

p Kat Fparo£ fiev ravra Trpa^a^ tig ' Pw/j.r]v fTrava^wpei tvdtKa err)
tv I&daiq,' UOVTIOQ £e IliXaro^ ^la^o^og aury rjKev. Antiq. lib. xviii. cap. 2
sect. 2.

Of the fifteenth Year of Tiberius. 393

Augustus, as Dr. Pagi is inclined to do, 28th August, A.
U. 764, A. D. 11 ; yet Pontius Pilate would even then be
in Judea in the fifteenth of that empire, which began Aug.
28th, A. U. 778, A. D. 25.

There is one difficulty, and but one in all this matter.
Josephus says that * Pilate — hastened away to Rome in

* obedience to the commands of Vitellius, not daring to
' refuse. But before he got to Rome, Tiberius was dead.'

It will be best to take the objection from Mr. Winston.
' Now it is known from Josephus, that Pontius Pilate was

* procurator of Judea but ten years ; and that he was put
' out so little before the death of Tiberius, that the emperor

* was actually dead, before Pilate arrived at Rome to an-
4 swer for himself. Tiberius died March 26th, 1 A. D. 37 ;

* and Pilate might be out of his office a month, or six weeks

* before, suppose it was February ; from thence we must count

* ten years backward for the beginning of Pilate's govern-
' ment, which will therefore fall into February, A. D. 27.'r

This is the difficulty : but I think it would be very wrong
to be determined by one single sentence against all the
evidence, which arises from the whole series of a narration.
It is extremely evident, that the feast-time in which Vitel
lius, being at Jerusalem, heard of the death of Tiberius, is
not the passover which followed next after Pilate's re
moval. I shall not repeat particulars, but content myself
with referring the reader to Josephus's account, already
transcribed.

And if this one sentence about the time of Pilate's arrival
at Rome be inconsistent with the rest of the story, it is more
reasonable to suppose, that Josephus was mistaken in this
particular, than in every thing1 else. He might be misin
formed about the time when Pilate got to Rome, but he
could not well be ignorant of some of the most remarkable
events in his own country ; that is, when Pilate left Judea,
when Caiaphas, and his successor Jonathan, were put out of
the high-priest's office.

But there is no reason to suppose, this particular is in
consistent with the other circumstances mentioned in this
relation. Mr. Winston indeed can allow but a month or six
weeks between the time of Pilate's removal out of his office,
and his arrival at Rome : but it ought to be considered,
that Pilate was not sent to Rome in order to take possession

* I suppose, that Mr. Whiston herein follows Dio, unless it be a fault of the
press : but, according to Suetonius and Tacitus, Tiberius died the 16th of
March. Vid. Pagi, Crit. in Baron. A. D. 37. n. ii.
. r Whiston's Short View of the Harmony of the Four Evangelists, p. 139.

394 Credibility of the Gospel History.

of a kingdom, or some new ample province, but to answer
for bis conduct in his late government. Nor was be sent
express; nor was he recalled by the emperor himself: but
he was sent away by Vitellius, a fellow-subject, though a
superior officer. Joseph us says, that ' Pilate hastened away
' to Rome.' I have given his words the strongest sense in
the translation ; but I think, the meaning is no more than
that he went away out of Judea. And Josephus intimates
very plainly, the reluctance with which Pilate obeyed
Vitellius, when he says, that he went, ' not daring to refuse.5

There was, if I mistake not, some law under the common
wealth, which required the governors of provinces to be at
Rome in three months time after their term of government
was expired ; but whether that law was in force now, T
cannot say. However, it is plain it was not observed :
Piso's conduct is a proof of it. Germanicus died in Novem
ber, or s sooner ; as maybe inferred from Suetonius, who
says, ' that the public sorrow for his death at Rome con-
' tinned even through the holy days of December: >k meaning,
I suppose, the Saturnalia, which were celebrated in the mid
dle of that month. And as Germanicus died in Syria, some
time must be allowed for the carrying the news of his death
from thence to Rome. Piso was gone from the province of
Syria before the death of Germanicus ; it is most probable,
that he was turned out by Germanicus;11 and yet he was
not come to Rome at the time of the Megalensian games of
the next year, which were kept on the fifth of April. It is
true, the people of Rome were very uneasy at these delays
of Piso ; because they wanted to have him brought to his
trial for the death of Germanicus, whom he was thought to
have poisoned ; but yet I do not perceive, that whenw his
trial came on, his long absence from Rome is reckoned up
amongst his other crimes.

And to add no more, the slowness of Tiberius in all his

8 Basnage [Ann. Pol. EC. Vol. i. p. 221.] supposes he died in July. Deci-
mo quinto Julii Germanicum vitam cum morte commutasse ex Tacito con-
jecturam facimus. Equester ordo instituit, uti turmae idibus Juliis imaginem
ejus sequerentur. Ann. lib. ii. cap. 83.

* Sed ut demum fato functum palam factum est, non solatiis ullis, non
edictis ullis inhiberi luctus public us potuit, duravitque etiam per festos Decem-
bris mensis dies. Suet, in Calig. cap. 6.

u Addunt plerique jussum [Pisonem] provincia decedere. Tacit. Ann. lib.
ii. cap. 70. v Et quia ludorum Megalensium

spectaculum suberat, etiam voluptates resumerent. Turn exuto justitio, redi-
tum ad munia ; et Drusus Illyricos ad exercitus profectus est, erectis omnium
animis petendae a Pisone ultionis ; et crebro questu, quod vagus interim per
amrena Asise atque Achaise, adroganti et subdola mora scelerum probations
subverteret. Tacit. Ann. 1. iii. cap. 6, 7. w Id. ibid. cap. 13.

Of the fifteenth Year of Tiberius. 395

proceedings may help us to account for Pilate's delays in
going to Rome, though it be supposed that he made a year
and a half of it.

Joseph us says, that Tiberius was the most dilatory prince
that ever lived. x His conduct toward Herod Agrippa affords
a strong proof of it. A servant of Agrippa waited upon the
prefect of Rome, assuring him he had some informations of
great consequence to give the emperor relating to his mas
ter : the prefect sent him to Tiberius, but he, without
making any particular inquiry into the matter, only keeps
the man safe in custody. Agrippa lying under the empe
ror's displeasure, was forced to make interest to have his
servant heard : and though he then informed the emperor
of words spoken by Agrippa, which were little less than
treason, and Agrippa was immediately thereupon confined ;
yet he was never called for again, though Tiberius lived six
months? after. Tacitus has mentioned another instance well
nigh, or quite as remarkable.2 This slow way of thinking
and acting was visible in Tiberius in his very youth ;a and
no historian of those times is silent about it. Pilate, who
had served Tiberius ten years, could not be ignorant of
what all the world knew ; he might have many probable
reasons to think, that if he did not come in the emperor's
way, he should never be called for ; if inquiry was made
for him, an excuse might be found out that would serve for
some time : sickness might be pretended, as a reason for
his stay in Asia, Achaia, or some other place where he was
got. Perhaps this was really the case. To be put out of
his government by Vitellius, upon the complaints of the
people of his province, must have been a very grievous
mortification : Eusebius assures us, that not long after this,
Pilate made away with himself, out of vexation for his many
misfortunes.1*

There is another note of time mentioned in St. John's
gospel, which ought also to be considered. Chap. ii. 20,

et Kai TIQ trfpwv j3am\£ojv r\ rvpavvuv yevofitvoQ. Antiq. lib.
xviii. p. 811. v. 3. y Joseph. Ant. lib. xviii. cap. 7.

z Consultusque Caesar an sepeliri sineret, (De Asinio Gallo loquitur,) non
erubuit permittere, ultroque incusare casus, qui reum abstulissent antequam
coram convinceretur. Scilicet medio triennio defuerat tempus subeundi judi-
cium consular! seni tot consularium parenti. Tacit. Ann. lib. vi. cap. 23.

a Saeva ac lenta natura ne in puero quidem latuit. Sueton. in Tiber, cap.
57. Sed mitigavit Sejanus, non Galli amore, verura ut cunctationes principis
aperirentur; gnarus eum lentum in meditando. Tacit. Ann. lib. iv. cap. 71.
Flornog HiXaTOQ em Ta'is Ka«7crpO£ TroiKiXaiQ 7T£pt7T£(Twv cru/u^opatf, a>£
tyaaiv ol TO. 'Pw/uaiwr <ruyypai|/a/i£voi, avrotyovivrrig iavra eytvero. Euseb.
Chron. p. 78.

396 Credibility of the Gospel. History.

" Then said the Jews, forty and six years was this temple
in building* : and wilt them rear it up in three days?"

I suppose, that the objection to be formed upon this text
is to this effect : these words were spoken by the Jews at
the first passover of our Saviour's public ministry, and the
next after his baptism by John. The temple which the
Jews spoke of, was the temple then before their eyes, and
which Herod had rebuilt or repaired. But Herod did not
make the proposal for rebuilding" it till the eighteenth year
of his reign, reckoning- from the death of Antigonus.
Therefore, if the fifteenth of Tiberius's reign, mentioned by
St. Luke, be the fifteenth of his proconsular empire, and
not of his sole empire after the death of Augustus, this tem
ple could not have been so long as forty-six years in build
ing, at the time these words were spoken.

To this I might answer, that an objection taken from Jo
seph us's account of the time when Herod repaired the
temple can be of little moment ; because in one place he
says, that Herod repaired the temple in the fifteenth,0 and
in another the eighteenth yeard of his reign. As the fif
teenth year from the death of Antigonus is supposed to be
coincident with the eighteenth year from the time in which
Herod was declared king of Judea by the senate of Rome ;
some may be disposed to conclude, that when Josephus
says, Herod's proposal to rebuild the temple was made to
the Jews in the eighteenth year of his reign, he computes
from the time in which Herod was declared king by the
Roman senate.

But I do not insist upon this, and am willing to allow,
that Herod made the proposal to the Jews of building* their
temple, in the eighteenth year of his reign from the death of
Antigonus.

And I think it is as likely, that the Jews, in these words
recorded by St. John, refer to the time of Herod's proposal,
as to the time in which he began actually to repair the tem
ple. It is most probable, that Herod made this offer to the
Jewish people, when assembled together at one of their great
feasts ; this therefore would be the most solemn and re
markable epoch of rebuilding the temple, which work un
doubtedly he set about as soon afterwards as he could.

And it is very common to say, that men do things, when
they propose to do them, or begin to do them. Thus Jose
phus says in his War of the Jews : ' In the fifteenth year

* of his reign he [Herod] repaired the temple itself, and in-

* closed a spot of ground about it, of double the compass
c De Bell. lib. i. cap. 21. init. d Ant. lib. xv. cap. 1 1. init.

Of the fifteenth Year of Tiberius. 397

« with that which surrounded it before : this was done at a
< vast expence, and is a proof of his uncommon magnifi-
' cence.'6 We will allow, that the fifteenth year in this
place ought to be corrected by his Antiquities, where he
says, that « in the eighteenth year of his reign Herod pro-

* jected [or undertook] the rebuilding- of the temple, which

* was the greatest of all his works.' f But then it appears
from hence, that Herod is said by Joseph us in one place to
do, what in another he is only said at the same time to pur
pose or begin.

Supposing that the Jews, in this text of St. John, refer to
the time in which Herod made the proposal of rebuilding
the temple, we will see how this term of forty-six years will
agree with the supposition, that St. Luke's fifteenth year of
Tiberius is the fifteenth of his proconsular empire.

If the fifteenth of Tiberius's proconsular empire began
the 28th of August, A. U. 778, A. D. 25, (according to
Dr. Pagi's opinion,) and if John the Baptist began to preach
in November that year, but did not baptize Jesus till after
he had preached a year and some months, then the passover
at which these words were spoken was the passover A. U,
780, A. D. 27.

Or if the fifteenth of Tiberius's reign began A. U. 779,
A. D. 26, and John began then to preach, and Jesus was
baptized by him some time before the passover next follow
ing, still these words would be spoke by the Jews at the
passover A. U. 780, A. D. 27.

The eighteenth year of Herod's reign, from the death of
Antigonus, is supposed to have begun some time in A. U.
734. Herod might make his offer to the Jews of rebuild
ing the temple at the feast of tabernacles in November that
year; from November A. U. 734, to the passover, A. U.
780, A. D. 27, is almost forty-five years and a half: at this
time therefore the Jews might not improperly say, the temple
had been forty-six years in building. The forty-sixth year
was then current, and it was to the purpose of the Jews,
rather to add to than to diminish the time which had be^n
spent in that work : so that there is no time more suitable
to these words of the Jews than the passover A. D. 27,
though there is no manner of inconsistence between under-

yav tT£i Trig fiaaiXeiag, avrov re TOV vaov £7Tt(TKtvaff£, Kat
ri\v TTfpt O.VTOV avtr£i%iffa.TO xupav, rr/£ a<rt]Q SnrXaaiav, ajuerpoig fiev ^pqcra/we-
VOQ TOI£ ava\<i)fjLa<nvt avv7rtpfl\T]T<t> £e ry TroXwrtXftp. De Bell. lib. i. cap. 21.
inil. f Tore y«v OKTUKaiStKars TTJQ 'HpioSs fiaatXtiae

ytyovoTOQ tviavTa,— - — epyov 8 TO TW%OV £7T£/3a\£ro, TOV vwv TS 0£8 Si awry

Ant. lib. xv. cap. 11. init.

398 ' Credibility of the Gospel History.

standing the fifteenth of Tiberius, of his proconsular empire,
and supposing- that these words were spoken at the pass-
over A. D. 28, and then the temple might have been above
forty-six years in building.

What has been here said, may be sufficient to show, that
St. Luke might compute the reign of Tiberius from the
epoch of his proconsular empire; that if he did, Jesus
might be said, with great exactness and propriety, to be
about thirty years of age at his baptism ; and that there is
nothing in this supposition, inconsistent with any other notes
of time mentioned in the gospels.

IV. Another way of solving this difficulty is this. These
words of St. Luke, " And Jesus himself began to be about
thirty years of age," may be understood with some latitude.
Jesus might be thirty s two years of age or more at this
time ; the word about, oxret, is often used where a precise
exactness is not intended or expected, Matt. xiv. 21, " And
they that had eaten were about five thousand, w<rei Trevraiciff-
X/Tueu, beside women and children." And the other evan
gelists, in speaking of this miracle, use the same phrase,
Mark vi. 44; Luke ix. 14; John vi. 10; St. Luke says,
Acts ii. 41, "And the same day there were added unto them
about [w<T6t] three thousand souls." And with a like lati
tude does this phrase seem to be used in many places, as
Luke i. 56 ; xxii. 41 ; xxiii. 44 ; John i. 39 ; Acts v. 36.

It is Kepler's opinion, that round and decimal numbers
may be used with great latitude ; and that a person may be
very truly said to be about thirty years of age, if he be
above five and twenty, and under thirty-five; but that, if a
person be said to be about eight and twenty, or about two
and thirty years of age, it is to be supposed, he is exactly
so old, or not above a month or two more or less.h

And indeed many examples of this use of round num-

8 Ex nostra quidem Chronologia, sequitur Christum jam annum xxxii.
evasisse cum ad baptismum accessit. Nil tamen in ea vel absurdi, vel pugnae
aliquid cum Luca intelligimus, cum de viro annos duos et triginta nato, cujus
aetas dubitanter profertur, non incongrue dici possit, est annorum circiter tri
ginta. — Iterum iterumque monemus, ex phrasi Lucse, Josephi de supremo
Herodis anno chronologia damnari nequit. Basnage, Ann. Pol. EC. Ante
Dom. 3. n. vi. vid. etiam ad A. D. 30. num. iv.

h Hie receptus mos est linguis omnibus ut circiter 5000 dicamus quicquid
est inter 4500 et 5500. Quare sic etiam in nostro exemplo quicquid est inter
25 et 35, id omne circiter 30 dici potest. Alia esset voculae ratio, si prsefixis-
set numero non rotundo. Ut si dixisset circiter 28 annos, vel circiter 32 annos.
Qu3e enim infra decem nominatim exprimuntur, iis apposita vocula circiter
raro unum annum solidum in dubio ponat, sed fere menses tantum aut dies
aliquot numero paucos et infra quantitatem anni solidi. Keplerus de Anno C.
Natali. cap. 12. p. 140, 141.

Of the fifteenth Year of Tiberius. 399

bers may be found in the1 best writers, even without the
particle wo-et, about : which of itself seems to be a hint,
that the writer does intend to be understood with some
latitude.

If we may take St. Luke's words in this manner, there is
scarce any need that I should trouble the reader with any
calculation, to show the agreement of his numbers with the
time of our Saviour's nativity.

The fifteenth of Tiberius's sole empire began A. U. 781,
A. D. 28. If Jesus was baptized the 6th January, A. TJ.
782, A. D. 29, he would be but some months above thirty-
three years of age, though he was born so soon as Septem
ber A. U. 748. And if he was born A. U. 749, then,
though his baptism be placed in the beginning of A. TJ. 783,
A. D. 30, still he would be little more than thirty-three
years of age.

All the other notes of time in the gospels are also very
easily reconciled with the 15th of Tiberius's sole empire.
Pontius Pilate came into Judea before the passover in the
12th year of Tiberius's sole empire, A. U. 779, A. D. 26, as
has been shown, and continued there ten years : therefore he
was undoubtedly governor of Judea at the commencement
of John the Baptist's ministry, and till after our Saviour's
crucifixion.

As for those words of the Jews spoken by them at the
first passover of our Saviour's ministry, " Forty-six years
has this temple been in building :" it is but to suppose that
they referred not to the time when Herod made the proposal
of repairing* the temple in the eighteenth year of his reign,
but to the time when in pursuance of that proposal he ac
tually set about the work, after he had got all things in a
readiness for it, and it will be easily perceived that these
words are agreeable to truth.

I do not presume to determine which of these two solu
tions is the justest ; or whether St. Luke intended the fif-

' Ab illo enim profectu viribus datis tantum valuit, ut in quadraginta deinde
annos tutam pacem haberet. Livius, 1. i. cap. 15. n. 7. This refers to Numa's
reign, of which afterwards Livy says : — Romulus, septem et triginta regnavit
annos, Numa tres et quadragijita. Ibid. c. 21. When the city of Rome
was taken by the Gauls, and the remnant of the people were entering into the
Capitol, Livy uses these words : Versa inde adhortationes ad agmen juvenum :
quos in Capitolium atque in arcem prosequebantur, commendantes virtuti
eorum juventaeque urbis per treccntos sexaginta annos omnibus bellis victri-

cis, fortunam. Id. liv. v. cap. 40. Camillus, not long after, in the very

same year, in his speech to dissuade them from removing to Veii, says, trecen~
tecimus sexagesimus quintus annus urbis, Quirites, agitur. Ibid. cap. 54
vid. eundem, lib. vi. cap. 28. n. 7. et Joan. Cleric, notas.

400 Credibility of the Gospel History.

teenth of Tiberius's proconsular empire, when he was made
colleague with Augustus, or the fifteenth of his sole empire.
In order to do this, it would be needful, as I apprehend, to
consider the time allotted by the evangelists to the ministry
pf John the Baptist and our Saviour, the chronology of the
Acts of the Apostles, compared with some passages in the
epistles, and also the testimonies of the ancient Christian wri
ters. As I have not here room for all these premises, it
may b.e best to wave the conclusion. All 1 shall say at
present is, that the supposition that St. Luke intended the
former of these two epochs, seems to be very much favour
ed by the first Christians; who generally place the cruci
fixion of Jesus at the passover of the fifteenth of Tiberius's
sole empire, when the two Gemini were consuls of Rome,
A. D. 29 : and that their testimonies are of great weight
with me. I subjoin in the margin k a few of them, for the
sake of those who may happen to be unacquainted with these
matters.

I apprehend, that each of these is a very good solution of
the objection stated at the beginning of this chapter, though
I believe many will think, it is there stated by me in a
manner very favourable to an objector. Nay, I imagine I
have said what is sufficient to satisfy any reasonable person,
that there does not lie any objection against any notes of
time mentioned by the evangelists from the chronology of
other ancient writers. This is sufficient to my present pur
pose.

1 have nothing farther to add here beside this one ob
servation.

It is no disparagement to the sacred historians, that we
are somewhat at a loss to settle precisely the very year of
some of those events which they have related. Many im
portant facts related by the best historians are attended with
chronological difficulties: I shall give but one instance, an
instance, with which we are nearly concerned. Josephus
was a man of a learned education, is a professed writer of

k Hujus [Tiberii'] quinto decimo anno imperii passus est Christus. — Quae
passio hujus exterminii intra tempera LXX. hebdomadarum perfecta est sub
Tiberio Csesare, Coss. Rubellio Geraino et Rufio Gemino, mense Martio, tem-
poribus Paschae. Tertul. advers. Jud. cap. 8. Atque exinde usque ad annum
quintum decimum Tiberii Caesaris, quando passus est Christus, numerantur
anni sexaginta. Africanus, apud Hieron. Dan. C. ix. Qui fuit sub imperio
Tiberii Caesaris ; cujus anno quinto decimo, id est, duobus Geminis consuli-
bus— Judaei Christum cruci affixerant. Lactant. Inst. lib. iv. cap. 10. Ex
tremis temporibus Tiberii Caesaris, ut scriptum legimus, Dominus noster Jesus
Christus a Judaeis cruciatus est,— duobus Geminis consulibus. De Mort.
Persecut. cap. 2.

Of dnnas and Caiapkas, High-priests* 401

history, of the civil and sacred history of his country, and is
generally allowed to be an accurate writer. He has ex
pressly mentioned two epochs of the commencement of
Herod's reign, and has given us an account of his death,
and the duration of his government : he has written the
history of the whole reign of this prince : he has related
the series of events, and the succession of the princes
and governors of Judea before and after Herod : he has put
down the years of the Olympiads, and the names of the con
suls, when some of the most remarkable of these events
happened. Nor have all Roman and Greek historians been
silent about Herod or his descendants, and the Jewish af
fairs, near this time ; not to mention Talmudical, or other
Jewish authors. And yet, notwithstanding all these advan
tages, whether through prejudice, or want of sufficient light,
it has happened, that learned men have differed widely
about the time of Herod's death, and are not yet come to a
full agreement.

CHAP. IV.

OF ANNAS AND CAIAPHAS.

I. The difficulty relating to their being both high-priests at
the same time considered. II. Of Caiaphas being high-
priest that year, in which Jesus was crucified.

I. WE have another objection ag*ainst the account St. Luke
gives of the government Judea was under, when John the
Baptist began to preach. Ch. iii. 1, 2, " Now in the fif
teenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate
being governor of Judaea, and Herod being tetrarch of
Galilee; — Annas and Caiaphas being the high-priests, the
word of God came unto John."

It is objected, that it appears from the books of the Old
Testament, the writings of Josephus and other Jews, that
there was but one high-priest among the Jews at a time :
St. Luke therefore has been mistaken in saying, that Annas
and Caiaphas were both high-priests.

Much has been written upon this subject, and learned

VOL. i. 2 D

402 Credibility of the Gospel History.

niena have been of divers opinions. I hope I may be ex
cused, if in this place I depart from the method I usually
take in considering these objections, and do not set down all
the sentiments of writers upon this point.

I shall here therefore do little more than deliver my own
sentiments concerning this matter in a few particulars ;
which, I hope, will contain a sufficient answer to the ob
jection.

1. It would be extremely unreasonable to impute to St.
Luke so great a mistake, as the supposing', that there were
properly two high-priests among* the Jews at the same time.
He appears in the rest of his history well acquainted with
Jewish affairs. It is plain, that he knew very well there
was one who was in the office of high-priest ; ch. xxii.
50, " And one of them smote the servant of the high"
priest*" — 54, " Then took they him and led him, and
brought him to the high-priest's house."

2. It is likely, that the power which the Jewish people
were possessed of under the Romans, was lodged chiefly in
the hands of two persons ; and it may be supposed the Jews
chose to have it so. When they had resolved upon the war
with the Romans, Josephus says : * They assembled in the
' temple, and appointed several generals ; and Joseph the
* son of Gorion, and the high-priest Ananus, were chosen
' to be supreme governors1" of all things in the city.' I
have not observed this passage quoted by any upon this
occasion : whether it be material or not the reader will j udge ;
but it has inclined me to suppose, that about this time there
were usually among the Jews two persons, to whom the
government was chiefly committed. I must however ad
vertise the reader, that Ananus, here called high-priest, was
not then in the office of the priesthood.

3. Since Caiaphas was now properly high-priest, and
Annas had been so : if the latter was now in some post of
authority, they might be both said very properly to be high-
priests at this time. Josephus often calls Saturninus and
Volumnius presidents or governors of Syria,0 though Satur-

a Vid. Baron. Ann. A. D. 31. num. 8. Casaubon in Baron. Exerc. xiii.

num. 5. Selden. de Success, in Pontif. lib. i. cap. 12. Hammond. Annot.
cum multis aliis. b Kat avvaOpotaQtvrfg UQ TO iepov,

^paTTjysg aTrtdtiZav TS TroXt/is TrXtio^af rjptOr] de luxrrjTrog VIOQ rwpiwvof,
icon 6 ap%i{ptvg A.VO.VOQ, rit)v Tt Kara TIJV iro\iv aTravTwv avroKpctToptQ, KCII
ftaXiTa TO, T6i%r) TrjQ TroXewe avtytiptiv. De Bell. lib. ii. c. 20. sect. 3.

C Ho\\CtKig [Ji£V £7Tl 2ar«pVll>OV tXOoVTO. KCtl OvO\Sf.iVtOV T8£ SvpiaQ r'lytfjLO-

vag. Ant. lib. xvi. cap. 10. p. 741. v. 1, 2. Totf Kaiaapog j'/yf/uoo-ii/ 2ar«p-
Kai OuoXa/zviy,— — £7ri re Sarypviva /ecu Ovo\sfjivis TMV
ib. cap. 9. p. 734. v. 25, et 37.

Of Annas and Caiaphas, High-priests. 403

ninus only was president, and Volumnius the emperor's
procurator, that is, the officer that took care of the revenue.
There happened a disturbance between the Jews and the
Samaritans in the reign of Claudius : Cumanus the procu
rator of Judea was not able to compose it ; appeals were
made to Quadratus president of Syria. He having punished
several, ' sent two others of the most powerful men of the

* Jews, as also the high-priests Jonathan and Ananias, and

* Ananus the son of this last-mentioned person, and some

* other considerable men, to Caesar.' d I take this passage
of Josephus (which has been often cited by learned men) to
be very near parallel with St. Luke's.

Jonathan had been high-priest, but had been put out
long before now by eVitellius : Ananias wasf now high-
priest. In like manner, in the case in question, Annas had
formerly been high-priest, but Caiaphas was now in that
office.

I am the more inclined to think Josephus's style here
parallel with St. Luke's, because it appears from another
place, where Josephus mentions this affair, that Ananus, the
third person named, was then captain of the temple. s From
whence I conclude, that the three persons here mentioned,
were then in the three chief posts of the Jewish civil and
sacred government. He speaks indeed of two others, whom
he calls the most powerful of the Jews ; but I apprehend
they were so only in respect of their influence: it is rea
sonable to suppose, that the persons named were in the most
eminent stations.

There is another particular in which these two passages
are parallel : Jonathan, who had been high-priest, is named
before Ananias, then in office : the two names stand in the
same order in St. Luke. I suppose, that these propositions
may afford a clear solution of this difficulty.

The learned Selden conjectures, that Annas and Caiaphas
are not mentioned in this place by St. Luke, on account of
any sacred function they discharged, but as they were the
two persons who had then the chief authority under the
Romans in the civil administration of the Jewish affairs :
that Annas was now prince of the sanhedrim, and Caiaphas
the father of it ; and that therefore Annas is first named, as
being in the more honourable station in the civil govern-

d Avo fa crepsf TWV SwaratTaTdiV, icai rag apxuptic; IwvaOrjv KO.L Avaviav,
TOV rt TBTS TraiSa Avavov, — av£7Ttyn^£v tTTt Katffapa. De Bell. lib. ii. cap.
xii. sect. 6. e Aut. lib. xviii. cap. 6. sect. 3.

{ Ib. lib. xx. cap. 4. p. 886. v. 41. * Ib. lib. xx. cap.

5. p. 889. v. 36.

404 Credibility of the Gospel History. "

ment. He supposes, that these two posts might then be
annual ; that Annas was prince of the sanhedrim when John
the Baptist began his ministry, and that Caiaphas was prince
when our Saviour was crucified. And therefore St. John
says particularly, ch. xi. 49, 51, that Caiaphas was high-
priest " that same year :" but that afterwards, when Peter
and John were called before the council, Annas, who is first
named, [Acts iv. 6.] was prince, and Caiaphas father of the
sanhedrim. h

Selden offers these thoughts as conjectures only. I
hope, therefore, it will not be deemed presumption to be of
another mind, or to offer some different thoughts upon this
subject.

As Caiaphas was now in the office of the priesthood,
when John the Baptist began his ministry, I suppose that
Caiaphas is mentioned by St. Luke on account of the high-
priesthood, and the civil authority joined with it; and that
the Jewish government being at this time under the Romans
aristocratical, Annas is mentioned, together with Caiaphas,
as being' the other chief person in the Jewish administration :
but I am of opinion, that we have not sufficient light at
present to determine what post of honour Annas was in,
though that of prince of the sanhedrim be as likely as any.
However, T cannot easily persuade myself, that during the
Jews' subjection to the Romans, the prince of the sanhedrim,
or any other Jew not in the high-priesthood, was equal,
much less superior to him who enjoyed that office; unless
when there was some Jewish prince appointed governor of
the temple by the Roman emperor. If Josephus's authority
be sufficient to decide this matter, it is plain the high-priest
had the chief power in the Jewish nation under the Romans :

h Hinc, si conjecturae venia detur, existimarim, Annam et Caiapham pon-
tifices simul a D. Luca dictos, non qua sacrae functionis dignitas illo nomine
denotatur, sed qua civilis eorum administratio, ut et caeterorum quibuscum
conjunguntur, ad ipsum annum, de quo verba ibi fiunt, indicandum denota-
retur. Scilicet Annam tune fuisse synedrii principem, Caiapham vero ejus-
dem patrem. Ita demum cur Caiaphas, quern sacram dignitatem ipsam, velut
Aharonis successorem, gessisse intervallo illo ex Josepho docemur, Annae post-
ponatur, ratio non inepta reddi potest. Etenim principi synedrii pater synedrii
erat semper secundarius. Sed vero nee principis nee patris synedrii munus
semper perpetuum erat, sed ab alio ad alium, pro re nata translatum. Quod
ex titulo Talmudico Horaijoth, cap. iii. aliisque magistrorum commentariis
elicitur. Et forsan tune temporis annuum erat. Atque illinc forsan altera
ilia quaestio de Caiaphae pontificatu suo anno apud D. Joannem designate
solvenda. Adeo ut anno Tiberii xv. seu in loco D. Lucae, Annas esset prin-
ceps synedrii, Caiphas pater, anno vero passionis Annas pater, Caiaphas prin-
ceps j postmodum vero Annas, inter suos utpote eminentissimus, itidem prin-
ceps, et Caiaphas pater, ut in Actorum quarto. Selden, de Sue. in Pontif. lib.
i. cap. 12.

Of Annas and Caiaphas, High-priests. 405

this may be concluded from hence, that he has preserved
the succession of the high-priests, and of them only, to the
destruction of the temple. But if there had been, after the
removal of Archelaus, any persons in an office of superior
authority to the high-priest, he would have also given us
their names : we should also, in all probability, have met
with some accounts, in his history, of the putting out of
these officers by the Roman governors, when they did not
behave to satisfaction. And indeed Josephus seems to me
expressly to say, that the high-priest was the chief person
in the Jewish nation under the Romans. Having at the
conclusion of his Antiquities reckoned up the Jewish high-
priests, he says : ' Some of these administered affairs under
4 Herod the king, and his son Archelaus: after their death

* the administration was aristocratical, but the president-

* ship of the nation was committed to the high-priests.'1

Farther, I apprehend no mystery at all in the order in
which these two persons are named by St. Luke. Ancient
writers seem not to be very solicitous about the order in
which they name persons who are near equal. k I suppose
that Caiaphas was at this time chief in dignity and autho
rity in the government : but that nevertheless, there is nq
absurdity or impropriety in naming Annas first, inasmuch as
he was father-in-law to Caiaphas, and was past the priest-*
hood.

II. It will perhaps be expected I should here say some
what to a text of St. John, which has a relation to this
matter, and which does appear at first to be a very difficult
place. John xi. 49 — 52, " And one of them named Caia
phas, being high-priest1 that same year, said unto them, ye
know nothing at all, nor consider that it is expedient for
us, that one man should die for the people, and that the

1 Kai TIVIQ jutv avTbiv tiro\iTivaavTo e-jri re 'Hpw&j /3aai\tvovTO£, Kai ETT*
TS TraidoQ avra' /xera $e TTJV rarutv TfXtvrrjv, api^roeparia /j,ev rjv rj
TroXiraa, ri]v ce 7rpo<racrtav r« e9vsQ oi ap%iepeiQ Tmri^tvovTo. Joseph. Antiq.
lib. xx. cap. 9. fin. k Thus Herodotus says,

that Cambyses was the son of Cyrus and Cassandana ; and presently after, that
he was son of this woman and Cyrus. flaptXafit TI\V fiaai\r)ir)v Kafi(3v-
&t]Q, Kvps f.(»)v TTO.IQ Kai Ka(Tcrav8avr]G' — ravrriQ de TIJQ yvvaiKoc iwv iraiQ KCU
Kvps Ka/t|8u<TJ7£. Euterp. init. Josephus says, Herod had two sons by a
Samaritan woman, namely, Antipas and Archelaus, Soon after Archelaus is
mentioned first, TJV St KQK TH Sa/Ltaptwv e0v«e pia, icai TraidfQ avry AvrnraQ
Kai Ap^fXaog — Ap%6\a.oQ fie Kai A-vrnraq nri 'Pw/i?j£ ?rapa nvi idiwry rpo^ag
eixov. Antiq. lib. xvii. cap. 1. sect. 3. Josephus says again, that Herod
called to the council at Berytus, Salome and Pheroras, De Bell. 1. i. c. 27.
sect. 3. Afterwards Tero the old soldier complains to Herod, that he
hearkened to Pheroras and Salome against his own sons, ib. sect. 4.

1 Apxupfut; wv re tviavrv

406 Credibility of the Gospel History.

whole nation perish not* And this spake he, not of him
self: but being™ high-priest that year, he prophesied, that
Jesus should die for that nation ; and not for that nation
only, but that also he should gather together in one the
children of God that were scattered abroad."

There are here two things which need to be explained ;
first, why Caiaphas is said to be high-priest " that same
year :" and secondly, what is meant by his " prophesying,"
being " high-priest."

Some have thought, that the phrase, " being high-priest
that year," implies that St. John supposed the high-priest
hood was annual ; and upon this account they have been
willing to charge him with a great mistake : for Pontius
Pilate was governor of Judea ten years, and Caiaphas was
put into the priesthood by Valerius Gratus, Pilate's prede
cessor, and continued in it till after Pilate's removal. Sel-
den thought, that by high-priest, is meant the chief man of
that nation, and particularly the prince of the sanhedrim,
which post might be at that time annual. For my own part,
I think, " that year" (as it ought to have been rendered,
and as the same phrase is rendered, ver. 51, and not " that
same year") denotes no more than " at that time." It is
very common to put * years' and * days' in the plural num
ber, for time. Ezek. xxxviii. 8, " After many days thou
shalt be visited : in the latter years thou shalt come into the
land that is brought back from the sword," &c. Mai. iii.
4, " Then shall the offerings of Judah be pleasant unto the
Lord, as in the days of old, and as in the former years."
There are other texts perhaps more apposite to our purpose.
Deut. xxvi. 3, " And thou shalt go unto the priest that shall
be in those days.9' Josh. xx. 6, " And he shall dwell in
that city, until the death of the high-priest that shall be in
those days." Philo uses the word day in the singular num
ber, in the same manner : speaking of the trial of jealousy,
he says, the man and the woman shall go up to the temple,
* and the man standing before the altar shall declare the
4 cause of his jealousy in the presence of him who is priest
' at that" day.' AH that St. John says therefore is, that
Caiaphas was high-priest at that time, or the high-priest of
that time. And if we ought to suppose any thing empha-
tical in the expression, [which yet I cannot see,] I appre
hend it arises from the distance between the time of the
event and the writing. St. John writing his gospel a con-

AXXa apxtfpevg wv TS emavrs tvsivs,

Kat o fitv avrjp <r«£ avrucpv r» (3aj[*n, jrapovrog TS Kar tKtivr]v TTJV
i, SrjXarat TTJV virovoiav a^a. K. X. De Legibus Special, p. 785. C.

Of Annas and Caiaplias, High-priests. 407

siderable time after the crucifixion of Jesus, when many
might be supposed to be ignorant who was then high-priest;
and there having been under the Romans frequent removals
made in that office ; it was natural enough for him to ex
press this circumstance with some peculiar emphasis, or to
mention it more than once.

The other difficulty to be considered lies in the words,
" being high-priest that year he prophesied." Here I can
not perceive the sense of this observation, supposing, with
Selden, high-priest to stand for prince of the sanhedrim.
By prophesying- I understand in this place, declaring the
event; which it was in a peculiar manner the office of the
priest to do, when he was inquired of, or when God was
inquired of0 by him, concerning- any important matters
tinder deliberation. Thus Joseph us says : * But the Philis-

* tines, when they heard that the Hebrews had made David

* king, brought forth their army against him. — But the king?

* of the Jews (for he allowed not himself to do any thing1
6 without prophesy, and the command of God, and assurance

* of the event from him) required the high-priest to foretell

* him, what was the will of God, and what would be the

* issue of the battle. When he had prophesied victory and
' power, he led out his forces against the Philistines.' And
presently after, ' The kingi of the Israelites inquiring again
' of God, concerning* the event of the battle, the high-priest
' prophesied,' that he should do so and so, and then would
have a sure and easy victory ; referring to the story told 2
Sam. v. 22—25.

Let us now apply these remarks in a general paraphrase
of this text of St. John. Some of the council, of a different
opinion from those whose words are recorded, ver. 48, having,
as may be supposed, from considerations taken from the
dispositions of the people, the temper of the Roman gover-

0 " Then the king sent to call Abimelech the priest the son of Ahitub. —
And Saul said unto him, Why have ye conspired against me, thou and the
son of Jesse, — and hast inquired of God for him?" 1 Sam. xxii. 11 — 13.
" And David said to Abiathar the priest, Bring hither the ephod. Then said
David, O Lord God of Israel,— 'Will the men of Keilah deliver me into his
hand ? Will Saul come down, as thy servant hath heard ? And the Lord said,
he will come down, " 1 Sam. xxiii. 9 — 1 J. " And when Saul inquired of the
Lord, the Lord answered him not, neither by dreams, nor by Uri?n, nor by
prophets," ch. xxviii. 6. p 'O 3t TUV IsSaiuJv /3a<ri\£V£' sfitv yap avev

7rpo0?jr£iac, Kai ra Kt\tvaai rov Qsov, /cat Trtpi TW £<ro/xevwi> \afitiv fyyvr]Ti]v
txetvov, kavTif) TTOH.IV CTrsrpfTrsr, £Kf\£vae TOV ap%i£pia, TI Soicei TQ 0«<^, KO.I
irodcnrov «7tu TO Trig /i«x»j£ rfXoc, TrpoXsytiv awry' TTpo^Tjrtvs'avrog £e VIKTJV
xai /cparoe, tZayti rr\v dwapiv nti TSQ IIaXat<riveg. Ant. lib. vii. cap. 4. sect. 1.

q \la\iv 3s TV fiaGiXewQ TMV Iffpan^iTW ipontva TOV Qeov, irtpi TIJV
, K. \. ibid.

408 Credibility of the Gospel History.

nor, and other circumstances of their affairs, expressed some
doubts about the success of a prosecution of Jesus, and the
consequences of taking* away his life : * Caiaphas, who was
the high-priest at that time, when it came to his turn to
deliver his opinion, said, You have hitherto talked very
weakly and ignorantly ; you may proceed in the case be
fore you without hesitation. The taking1* away the life
of this man will be so far from being ruinous to the whole
nation in this country and in other parts, as some of you
fear, that it will be much for the advantage of the people
of God every where. This however he said, not merely
of himself, but being then high-priest, he foretold the is
sue and event of their counsels, and of the death of Jesus :
and that its would come to pass that Jesus would die for
that nation, and not for that nation only, but that through
his death, he would also gather together in one the chil
dren of God which were scattered abroad.'

CHAP, V.

OF THE DIFFERENT NAMES GIVEN TO HERODIAS'S FIRST
HUSBAND BY THE EVANGELISTS AND JOSEPHUS.

I COME now to consider the difficulty hinted above,a
arising from the different names given by the evangelists
and Josephus to the first husband of Herodias ; whom they
call Philip, Josephus, Herod. I need not transcribe here
the passages of the gospels, Matt. xiv. 3; Mark vi. 17 ; Luke
iii. 19, or of Josephus, relating to this affair. If the reader
will be pleased to look backb he will find what is sufficient
for the purpose.

As Josephus, spjeaking of this unlawful marriage of He
rod the tetrarch and Herodias, calls her first husband Herod ;
so it is certain, that according to him, Philip, whom St.
Luke, ch. iii. 1, styles " tetrarch of Iturea and the region of
Trachonitis," could not be the person : for Josephus says,
that Herodias's daughter Salome was married to Philip,

'Y/iaf SK oidare aStv' sde ciaXoyi&aBe OTI avfjujtepti t»juiv, iva
airoOavy vTTfp TS Xas, KCII p.rj 6Xov TO tOvog cnro\r]Tai.
8 UpoetprjTevatv on e/itXXtj/ 6 Ii}Gxg a.TroQvr]QKiiv vntp r&
a P. 19. note (y). b p. 19—21.

Concerning the first Marriage of Herodias. 409

Herod's son, the tetrarchc of Trachonitis. Nor is there any
mention made in Joseph us of any other son of Herod the
Great, who was called Philip, beside the fore-mentioned
tetrarch of Iturea and Trachonitis.

I have no reason to say any thing1 more of Philip the te
trarch, than I have done already ; having1 shown in another
place/1 that St. Luke has given a just account of him. But
I will here give a brief history of Herod, to whom Josephus
says Herodias was first married ; because I apprehend it
may be needful for some readers, and it will be of great use
to us upon this occasion.

Herod was the son of Herod the Great by Mariarnne,
daughter of Simon the high-priest. After Herod the Great
had killed his two sons Alexander and Aristobulus, he re
pented of what he had done, and resolved to take special
care of their children. And in particular, he contracted
Herodias, daughter of Aristobulus, to the above-mentioned
Herod. e There happened indeed afterwards some alter
ations in the dispositions made by Herod the Great at this
time; but, however, thisf contract remained good, as may
be concluded from hence; that this contract is not men
tioned among those alterations, and because in the account
Josephus gives of Herod the tetrarch's unlawful marriage
with Herodias, her first husband, whom she left in his life
time, is expressly said to be Herod son of Mariamne the
high-priest's daughter.

Herod the Great in one of his wills, made after this con
tract, appointed the said Herod his successor, in case Anti-
pater should die before him. But afterwards, in the
inquiries concerning Antipater's design to poison his father,
it appeared that Mariamne, mother of Herod, had been con
cerned in the same design : whereupon Herod the Great
put away Mariamne, altered the clause of his will relating1
to her son, and took away the priesthood from her father^
Simon. After this we hear no more of Herod, till we have
the accounts of Herodias's leaving him.

Here then lies our difficulty. The evangelists call He-

'H fie Suyar^p avrrfQ SaXwjuTj <&iXi7T7n£) ya^arcri, 'Hpw£« Trai^i, rip

d Page 18. e EveyyuTjro re «£ ya/iov, — TI\V de tTtoav

TWV ApiTO/SsXa 3-uyarfpwv, Hpwfly, iraidi ry aura' yiveroti 8e T^> fiamXfi IK rrjg
TH apxitpewG 3-uyarpo£. Antiq. lib. xvii. cap. 1. p. 751. v. 1. vid. etiam p.
1027. v. 36. f Vid. Joseph, p. 751. v. 20. p. 1028. v. 35.

g Kori diet Tads 'Hpiodrjc; fKtivrjv re e£f/3a\£, KOI TOV viov avrrfg E%r)\er^>£ T<av
^ia0/j»cwv, H£ TO j3aai\ev<Tai fie/jiVTJiJievcJV tKtivt* /cat TOV TTtvQtpov TTJV ap^;i£pa>(TU-
vtjv a06t\aro Stjwwva, TOV TS BorjQti. Antiq. lib. xvii. cap. iv. p. 757. v. 43.
vid. etiam p. 1032. v. 33.

410 Credibility of the Gospel History.

rodias's first husband Philip. It is objected, that they must
mean Philip the tetrarch. But it is plain from Josephus,
that Philip the tetrarch was not her first husband, but He
rod, son of Herod the Great, by Mariamne the high-priest's
daughter.

in answer to this : 1. It has been said by some, that Jo
sephus was mistaken. Basnage11 of Flottemanville, whom
I have often quoted, is fully persuaded, that Philip, tetrarch
of Iturea and Trachonitis, was Herod ias's first husband.
Beside that the evangelists lived nearer the time of the event
than Josephus, he says, they had more reason to be well in
formed in this matter than Josephus, and they are three to
one. Mr. Basnage does not deny Herod's having had a
son of his own name by the high-priest's daughter; but he
says, this son died before his father. And he thinks, that
Josephus says as much, and has assured us, that after Anti-
pater was dead, Herod had no sons left, besides Archelaus,
Herod Antipas, and Philip, betwixt whom he divided his
kingdom. And therefore Josephus is guilty of a most fla
grant self-contradiction, in making the son of the high-
priest's daughter Herod ias's husband. Besides, there is no
mention of this son in Herod the Great's last will ; which
would be very strange, if he was then alive, especially con
sidering that Herod left his sister Salome a very good estate
in land.

This is Basnage's solution; but, in my opinion, a very
poor one. 1 will not be positive, that Josephus has made
no mistake in the accounts of Herod's family; because where
a man has issue by seven or eight wives, as Herod had,
perhaps a writer had need to have a head peculiarly turned
for genealogy, to be secure from all errors, in giving an ac
count of his children and all their marriages ; especially,

h Nulla ergo excusatio Josepho parari potest. Cujus narration i, ilia evan-
gelistarum, missa vel eorum ava^apTrjffia, dubio procul est anteponenda, cum
testes et plures et antiquiores fuerint et rationes longe graviores habuerint dili-
gentius inquirendi in causas mortis illatae Joanni, quas ducunt ex Herodiadis,
Philippe legitimo viro, contra jus et fas, ab Antipa ereptae odio, in Joannem,
scelestas nuptias damnantem. Equidem Josephus tenetur nr avTo^pi^ depre-
hensus, cum ipse docuerit, Herodi Magno post mortem Antipatri, nil filiorum
fuisse, prater Archelaiim, Herodem Antipam, et Philippurn, quos inter, regnum
diviserat suum. Nee vero simile est, in testamento, hujus Herodis, Herodiadi,
ut ait Josephus, matrimonio conjuncti, parentem non meminisse, ne expers
partis esset de bonis ejus j eo magis, quo multa Salomae sorori suae praedia
moriendo dederat Herodes. Id faciles Josepho largiemur, ex Simonis pontificis
filia procreatum Herodi regi filium fuisse, paterno nomine donatum. Parent!
superstitem fuisse, negabimus, ex alto historiae judaicas silentio, in qua vir ille
partes egisset suas.— Erravit igitur Josephus. Basn. Ann. Polit. Eccles. A. D.
20. n. 3.

Concerning the first Marriage of Herodias. 411

considering how much the1 female descendants of Herod
increased the task in a short time, by leaving* or divorcing
their husbands. But I can never persuade myself, that Jo-
sephus, a professed writer of Jewish history, could be guilty
of so many mistakes, as are included in a mistake about
Herodias's first husband. If he was not furnished with the
events of all Herod's children, yet he must certainly know
the marriages of the last princes in the land of Israel, his
own country. Could he be ignorant who was Philip the
tetrarch's wife? Who was the first husband of Herod the
tetrarch's second wife, and of Agrippa the Great's sister ?
Was not Herodias's leaving her first husband in all respects
a most notorious action? Was not Josephus well acquainted
with her nephew, Agrippa the young'er ?

Basnage says, Josephus has assured us, Herod had but
three sons left after the death of Antipater. I think Jose
phus has never said any such thing. If he had, he would
be a writer of no weight ; since he has afterwards expressly
said, that Herod ias's first husband was Herod, the son of
the high-priest's daughter. And if Josephus had assured
us, that Herod the Great had but three sons left after An
tipater was dead, Basnage might have spared his arguments
from the omission of Herod the high-priest's daughter's son,

' Beside Herodias, her three nieces, daughters of her brother Herod Agrippa,
would employ the attention of an historian. Bernice, the eldest, after the
death of her first husband, Herod king of Chalcis, married Polemon king of
Cilicia, [or, as some read it, Lycia]. * But this marriage lasted not long; for

* Bernice left Polemon.' Qv fj.iv ETTI TTO\V ovvffitivtv 6 ya/uog, a\\a Bfpi/iKj;,
Si dKoXaaiav, WQ ttyaaav, KaTaXtnrii TOV IJoXf/iwva. Ant. lib. XX. cap. 6. sect.
3. * Mariamne [the second daughter] about the same time, having divorced

* Archelaus, the son of Helchias, married Demetrius the Alabarch of the Jews

* at Alexandria.' Tip avTtp fie Kaipcp KCH Mapiaftvrj, 7rapatTT](rcip.tvrj TOV Ap%e-
Xaov, avv<f)Ki]at rtp A^/ijjrpi^' — rort £17 Kai TTJV a\a(3apxiav avrog «x«' ib.
Drusilla, the youngest, left Azizus king of the Emesenes, and married Felix,
as has been shown already, p. 27, 28. I have put down here all these in
stances for the sake of a remark. Our Saviour says : " Whosoever shall put
away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if
a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she com
mitteth adultery," Mark x. 11, 12. It may be inferred from hence that the
Jewish women, as well as the men, did then practice divorces, and after that
marry to others. These instances from Josephus confirm the inference. We
may be assured these ladies were not singular : their examples would be fol
lowed by others ; and, it is likely, were supported by many precedents. If
the women took this licence, what would not the men do ? Our historian
Josephus affords us a double example of this practice. His first wife left him,
vit. sect. 75. and he married another. Her he divorced, after he had had
three children by her, because he was not pleased with her manners. And
then he married a third, by whom also he had children : »ca0' 6v Srj icaipov
K<U rr\v yvvaiKctj pr} aotaKOfiivoq avTr)Q TOIQ rjQtatv, airtireu\l/anr]v, Tpiuv ?rai-
B(DV yevontvijv nrjrepa' sect. 76.

412 Credibility of the Gospel History.

and the large estate left to Salome, in Herod the Great's last
will.

Indeed, there is no reason to conclude that Herod, son of
the high-priest's daughter, died before his father; but a
great deal of reason to suppose he survived him, beside the
express mention made of him long afterwards, as the hus
band of Herodias. For in the will his father made after the
inquiries into Antipater's conspiracy, and therefore in the
last year of his life, this said Herod's succession was struck
out, as Josephus expressly says.k And though there be no
mention made in the account of Herod's last will, of any
other sons by name, beside those to whom he left a part of
his territories ; yet it is very likely, there were others to
whom he left presents.1 It is not strange, that Herod should
leave no towns or lordships to this son (though living) in
his last will, since his mother had been lately detected in a
great crime. Nay, it is not strange, that three sons only of
Herod had tetrarchies, and the rest, though never so many,
only sums of money or revenues. As for the towns be
queathed by Herod to his sister Salome, she had been al
ways faithful to him, and it was fit she should have some
extraordinary testimony of his affection. Josephus himself"1
assigns this as the reason of that regard showed to her in
Herod's wills.

And Philo says, that when Pilate dedicated shields, and
placed them in Herod's palace at Jerusalem," the Jews
got0 four of the king's sons, and other his descendants, to
make use of their interest with Pilate to remove the shields.
If Philo may be relied upon in this matter, and if we
may understand the word sons in the most proper sense,
(which it seems most reasonable to do,) and not for grand
children, or other descendants ; then Herod must have
left behind him at least two sons, beside the three betwixt
whom he divided his dominions ; for Archelaus certainly
was not one of the four sons whom Philo speaks of, because

k See before, p. 365. } Josephus's account of Herod's

last will is, that he gave to Herod Antipas, Galilee, &c. to Philip, Gaulonitis,
&c. to Archelaus, the kingdom, to Salome his sister, Jamnia, &c. and that he
took care of all the rest of his family, leaving them handsome legacies of
money, or ample revenues. Ilpsvorjcre Se KOI TIOV XOITTWV OTTOGOI
pquaTwv re doaevi KO.I Trpocro^wv ava0opai£> c/ca<r«£ iv
Ant. lib. xvii. cap. 8. sect. 1.

re CTTI fitya e7r\&Ti£ev rtjv ct()t\<j)r]v, evvsv TI tv Traai TTQOQ avrov
', K. r. \. Antiq. lib. xvii. cap. 6. sect. 1.

AvctTiQr]aiv tv TOIQ Kara rr\v lepoTroXiv 'Hpw&j (3affi\tioi£. Philo* de
Legat. in Cai. p. 1034. A. * Upo^rjactfjitvoi TSQ re (3affi\twQ

v\ti£ TtrrapaQ, — Kai TUQ aX\«£ a?royov8£. Id. ibid.

Concerning the first Marriage of Uerodiai. 413

he had been banished into Gaul long before Pilate's go
vernment. Supposing then, that Herod tetrarch of Galilee,
and Philip tetrarch of Trachonitis, were two of the four,
there must have been two other sons of Herod, beside them
and Archelaus.

But however Philo ought to be understood, I can never
think it a fair way of getting rid of this difficulty, to charge
Josephus with a great many gross blunders.

2. I proceed therefore to lay before the reader another
solution, which has been in the main approved of already
by many learned men.

(1.) The evangelists and Josephus are in the right, and
none of them have committed any mistake in this matter.
I have just shown, that there is no reason to think Josephus
was mistaken : and it is as unreasonable to suppose, that the
evangelists are mistaken. They all agree in calling* Hero-
dias's first husband Philip ; and they appear to be fully
masters of the history of Herod the Great's family. One or
other of them have told us, that Archelaus succeeded his
father in Judea ; that Herod (who was also called Antipas)
was tetrarch of Galilee, Philip of Trachonitis. If they had
not been well informed, some errors would have appeared
here. St. Luke has given the proper titles and characters to
all the other descendants of Herod, whom he has mentioned
afterwards ; Herod the king, Agrippa, Bernice, Drusilla.

They speak of this unlawful marriage of Herod ias, as a
matter they were well acquainted with, and Josephus con
curs with them in the main.

(2.) The evangelists do not intend Philip the tetrarch,
but the same person that Josephus does. If they had in
tended Philip the tetrarch, when they speak of Herodias's
husband, they would have given him his title : this is their
constant method. St. Matthew says, that Jesus was born
" in the days of Herod the king," ch. ii. 1. St. Luke, that
the vision of Zacharias was " in the days of Herod the king*
of Judea," ch. i. 5. In the account of our Saviour's return
from Egypt, St. Matthew says, that Joseph heard that " Ar
chelaus did reign in Judea, in the room of his father Herod,"
ch. ii. 22. St. Luke gives the proper titles to all the princes,
whom he mentions at the beginning of John the Baptist's
ministry. In the account of Pilate's sending our Saviour to
Herod, it appears plainly, that he was the tetrarch of Gali
lee, to whom he was sent, Luke xxiii. 6 — 8. When St.
Luke begins the history of Herod Agrippa, he calls him
" the king," Acts xii. I. He gives also the title of" king"
to "Agrippa," Acts xxv. 13.

414 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Indeed, the church at Jerusalem in their prayer to God,
give Herod and Pontius Pilate no titles, Acts iv. 27 ; and I
believe, none would have them there at length. In the ac-<
count of the death of John the Baptist, and of this marriage,
all the evangelists do ever give Herod his title : Matt. xiv.
1 ; Mark vi. 14 ; Luke iii. 19, ix. 7. But not one of them has
given the Philip, whom they mention, any title; but that
" Herod had laid hold of John, and put him in prison for
Herodias' sake, his brother Philip's wife," Matt. xiv. 3,
or bound him in prison " for Herodias' sake, his brother
Philip's wife," Mark vi. 17. Again, " Herod the tetrarch
being reproved by him for Herodias his brother Philip's
wife," Luke iii. 19. I make no doubt therefore, but that
Philip, Heroclias's first husband, was a private person, who
lived, in all probability, at Jerusalem ; and that Herod the
tetrarch, in his way to Rome, there fell in love with her,
and made the contract. Philip then, whom the evangelists
speak of, as the first husband of Herodias, was a private
person, invested with no titles or dignities : so is Jose-»
phus's Herod, as appears from the history I have given of
him. And it is not unlikely, that this was one reason,
among others, why Herod the tetrarch's proposal of mar
riage was so soon accepted by Herodias, an ambitious
woman.

The only difficulty therefore concerning this matter, arises
from the name. Josephus calls this person Herod, the
evangelists Philip : moreover, Philip was the name of the
tetrarch of Iturea and Trachonitis ; therefore it may be
thought strange, that Herod the Great should have another
son called Philip.

This difficulty will be cleared by the following consider
ations. It is not at all strange, that Herod the Great should
have two sons called by the same name, when he had chil
dren by seven or eight wives. Even according to Josephus,
the eldest son was called Antipater, and another, who was
the youngest, Antipas, or Herod Antipas, the tetrarch of
Galilee. These are but one and the same name, only a dif
ferent termination. Josephus mentions three of Herod's
sons of the name of Herod, without any addition.? But yet
it is highly probable, they had some other names, by which
they were distinguished, though Josephus has not mentioned
them. Grotiusi thinks it very probable, there was a Philip
among the ancestors of Herod the Great, after whom two of

P Vid. Jos. Ant. lib. cap. 1. lib. xviii. cap. 6. sect. 4. De Bell. lib. i. cap.
28. et Geneal. Herod, in Reland. Palest. Illustr.
q In Matt. xix. 3.

Concerning the first Marriage of Hevodias. 415

his sons were named Philip ; as there were two of them,
who bore the name of Antipater or Antipas from his father.
Though there was another brother by the same father,
namely, Philip the tetrarch, called by the same name with
Herodias's husband ; yet it was not necessary for the evan
gelists to take notice of it. When writers relate a well-
known fact, near the time in which it happened, whilst there
is no danger of persons making a mistake, this precaution
is often neglected. Dio's account of Archelaus's removal is
thus : ' Herod of Palestine being accused by his brothers,

* was banished to the otherr side the Alps.' Herod was the
name by which the tetrarch of Galilee was usually called;
and he also was afterwards banished to the other side the
Alps: yet I believe no one ever charged Dio with a mis
take here, as to the person he speaks of, or suspected, that
he thought the tetrarch of Galilee was banished from his
dominions, A. U. 759. I will transcribe here an observation
of the learned and judicious sPrideaux. ' He [Ptolemy

* Lathyrus] was succeeded by Cleopatra his daughter, and

* only legitimate child. Her proper name was Berenice,
4 and so Pausanias calls her. For it is to be noted, that as

* all the males of this family had the common name of Pto-
t lemy, so all the females of it had the name of Cleopatra,

* and besides had other proper names to distinguish them.

* from each other. Thus Selene was called Cleopatra, and

* so were also two other of her sisters. And in like man-

* ner,this daughter of Lathyrus, whose proper name was Bere-

* nice, bore also that of Cleopatra, according to the usage

* of her family. The observing of this will remove many

* obscurities and difficulties in the Egyptian history.'

The evangelists do all agree in calling Herodias's first
husband Philip, and they appear fully masters of their
story : it is therefore highly reasonable to suppose, he was
called Philip as well as Herod. I shall put a case resem
bling this: Josephus always calls Livia, Augustus's wife,1
Julia, though that was the proper name of Augustus's
daughter, without ever giving the least hint of his reason
for it. It is true, that though the Roman historians do
generally call her Li via, yet they have told us, that she had
also the name of Julia, and have informed us of the reason
for it: which was, that Augustus in his last will adopted
his wife into the Julian family, and appointed that she should

r 'O re 'Hpwdrjg o HaXai^ijvo^ ainav nva airo TWV adtXQwv XajSwv, VTTO

c A\7T£t£ i>7T£pa>pt<T0q. Lib. Iv. p. 767. B.

8 Con. Part. II. year before Christ, 81. p. 396.

1 Vid.Jos. p. 1028. not. ".

416 Credibility of the Gospel History.

bear the name of Julia. u And there are medals on which
she bears this name. But if nothing of this had appeared
in any of the Roman authors or inscriptions that are extant,
yet since Josephus appears to be well acquainted with the
Roman affairs from Julius Caesar down to his own time; I
believe most men would have allowed, that he had some
good reason for calling" the wife of Augustus, Julia. For
the same reason, a like supposition ought to be made in
behalf of the evangelists, in the case before us.

It was exceeding1 common among" the ancients, Jews and
others, for persons to have two names, and to be called
sometimes by the one and sometimes by the other. There
are several instances in the New Testament : " Simon, who
is called Peter; Lebbeus, whose surname was Thaddeus,"
Matt. x. 2, 3. " Thomas, which is called Didymus," John
xi. 16. " Simeon, that was called Niger," Acts xiii. 1,
" Saul, who was also called Paul."

Josephus calls Caiaphas, the high-priest, Joseph. He has
indeed told us, that he was also called Caiaphas. v If
mankind would have been as equitable to the writers of
the New Testament, as they usually are to other authors, to
some who are far from giving* equal tokens of skill or
probity with them ; this would have created no difficulty,
though Josephus had never subjoined the name of Caiaphas
to that of Joseph. But if any had been disposed to give
the evangelists unfair and unequal treatment, it is likely
they would have pretended, that here was a notorious blun
der : and that Caiaphas was so far from being high-priest
when John Baptist began his ministry, and when Jesus was
crucified, that there never was any such person high-priest
among the Jews.

1 hope what is already said may be sufficient to convince
all reasonable men, there is no just ground to suspect the
evangelists of any mistake in the name of Herod ias's first
husband. However, there is somewhat farther to be offered:
there are other writings extant, in which he is called Philip.
I shall transcribe here the account of it in Whitby's words:

* Gorionides saith, Herodias was first married to Philip, and

* then taken away from him by Herod Antipas. The old
' Hebrew chronicle saith, " Uxorem fratris sui Philippi ip-

* so vivente junxit sibi matrimonio, quse liberos ex fratre

* ejus susceperat, et tamen is earn duxit uxorem" (chap.
' 36). And an old chronicle of the second temple saith,

u Tiberium et Liviam haeredes habuit. Livia in familiam Juliam nomenque
Augustae adsumebatur. Tacit, lib. i. cap. 8. vid. etiatn Sueton. Aug. cap. 101.
Dion. p. 600. A. * P. 795. v. 23. p. 802. v. 28.

Of Zacharias, the Son of Barachias. 417

" Antipas Philippi fratris sui uxorem accepit, ex qua ille

* liberos ante genuerat." (F. 54. c. 4.) i. e. " Antipas

* married the wife of his brother Philip, he being yet living,
4 and having had children by her."'w

CHAP. VI.

OF ZACHARIAS, THE SON OF BARACHIAS.

THERE are some difficulties attending the prophetical re
presentation, given by our Lord, of those judgments, which
he foresaw would soon befall the Jewish nation. This we
have in two of the evangelists, in St. Matthew and St. Luke.
One account will illustrate the other, and we may have some
occasion to refer to each of them : therefore I shall set them
both down here at once.

The account of this matter, as it stands in St. Matthew, is
thus : ch. xxiii. 29 — 36, " Woe unto you, scribes and pha-
risees, hypocrites, because ye build the tombs of the pro
phets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous : and say,
if we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not
have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye be the
children of them that killed the prophets. Fill ye up then
the measure of your fathers. Ye serpents, ye generation of
vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell ? Where
fore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and
scribes, and some of them ye shall kill and crucify, and
some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and
persecute them from city to city : that upon you may come
all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood
of righteous Abel, unto the blood of Zacharias, son of Ba
rachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
Verily, I say unto you, all these things shall come upon
this generation."

The parallel place in St. Luke, ch. xi. 47 — 51, is in these
words: " Woe unto you, for ye build the sepulchres of the
prophets, and your fathers killed them. Truly ye bear
witness, that ye allow the deeds of your fathers; for they
indeed killed them, and ye build their sepulchres. There-
w Whitby, on Matt. xiv. 3.

VOL. I. 2s

418 Credibility of the Gospel History.

fore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them prophets
and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and perse
cute ; that the blood of all the prophets, which was shed
from the foundation of the world, may be required of this
generation ; from the blood of Abel, unto the blood of
Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the tem
ple; verily, I say unto you, it shall be required of this
generation."

Here the evangelists may be charged with a mistake
several ways. They who would suppose, that Zacharias
here referred to is Zacharias, one of the twelve lesser Jew
ish prophets, will say, they must have been mistaken, be
cause in the time of this Zacharias, the temple is supposed to
have been in ruins : and therefore it is impossible he should
have been killed between the temple and the altar. And
others, who suppose Zacharias, here intended, is Zacharias,
whose death is related in 2 Chron. xxiv. may say, that St.
Matthew mistook the name of his father; for his name was
Jehoiada, and not Barachias.

There is another Zacharias, whose death is related by
Josephus ; but that happened not till long* after the time in
which our Saviour is supposed to have spoken these words.
This seems to afford the most formidable objection : I shall
therefore state and consider it particularly : and in answer
ing this, I hope to answer also the other two.

Before I state this objection, I shall here transcribe the
passage of Josephus on which it is founded. I must abridge
it indeed, but I shall omit nothing that is material to the
point before us.

' The zealots,' says Josephus, ' were exceedingly enraged

' against Zacharias,* the son of Baruch : for he was a man

' who detested all wickedness, was a lover of liberty, and

' moreover was very rich. They callb together therefore

by a decree seventy of the chief of the people, and form a

kind of council, destitute of all authority. They then

brought Zacharias before them, and accused him of a con

spiracy with the Romans : and in particular charged him

with sending* messengers to Vespasian, the better to con

cert measures for betraying them into his hands.' But

they had no witnesses. The facts were not proved. Zacha

rias, in a speech he delivered before the council, confuted

all the calumnies of the zealots, and warmly reproved them

for their wickedness. ' The seventy then acquitted him,

4 choosing rather to die with him than to bring upon them-

viov
ifi$op.r)Kovra TWV tv rt\ti

Of Zacharias, the Son of Barachias. 419

* selves the imputation of his death. He being thus ab-

* solved, the zealots raised a loud clamour against those

* judges, as not understanding the design, for which they

* had been invested with authority. And two of the most

* daring of the zealots, falling upon Zacharias in the middle
' of the temple, slew him there.'0

It may be said then : from hence it appears, that the wri
ters of these books were not acquainted with the affairs of
those times : these writings therefore do not come from St.
Matthew or St. Luke : at least the authors of them did not
live at the time they are supposed to have lived ; possibly
not till long afterwards. How else could they have com
mitted such a blunder, as to make Jesus tell the Jews of his
time, in the reign of Tiberius, that they had killed Zacha
rias the son of Barachias, or Baruch ? when Josephus in
forms us, that he was not killed till the latter end of Nero's
reign, above thirty years after these words are said to have
been spoken by Christ.

I. To this I answer, in the first place, that the fact re
lated by Josephus does not suit the words of Christ in the
evangelists.

For, (1.) the name of the father of Zacharias seems to be
different. Whitbyd observes, ' that as Baruch in Jeremiah,
and the Apocrypha, is always called by the Septuagint
Ba/asx, Baruch, so nO"O, Barachiah, is rendered by them
Ba/>axm?, Barachiah, Isa. viii. 2; Zech. i. 1, 7. And in
Neh. iii. we find Ba/)ax<a9» Barachias, v. 4, and Ba/38x, Ba
ruch, v. 20, which shows they were not the same name.'
(2.) Their characters are not the same. The design of
our Saviour's discourse obliges us to suppose, that Zacha
rias, whom he mentioned, was a prophet : whereas Zacha
rias in Josephus has not that character from him.

(3.) The place in which they are said to have been slain,
is not the same. Zacharias, in the gospels, perished " be
tween the temple and the altar, according to both St. Mat
thew and St. Luke : but there is no reason to suppose, that
Josephus's Zacharias was slain in the inner court, in which
the altar stood. The council was not held within that court :
and Zacharias seems to have been slain immediately after
his absolution by the council. If he was slain in any part
of the lepov, temple, that is perfectly agreeable to the words
of Josephus ; for under that name were comprehended the
temple, and all the courts and buildings belonging to it.
These several instances of disagreement, I should think,

c Ayo fo rwv roX/ujjporarwv, TrpotTTrttrovrtg sv jueovp ry t«p<^, SicHpOtipaai TOV
Zayaoiav. De Bell. lib. iv. c. 5. sect. 4. d On Matt, xxiii. 35.

2E2

420 Credibility of the Gospel History.

must incline most persons to conclude, that the same4
Zacharias was not intended by the evangelists and Jose
ph us.

But perhaps this is more than is reasonable to expect
should be allowed by an objector. He can easily believe
of writers, who are in little credit with him, that they may
run far wide of the truth, and really intend a fact that has
but a small resemblance with their relation. With such,
what hath been said hitherto will have little weight.

I proceed therefore to some other considerations.

II. I say then, that our Lord, in the words we are now
considering, instanceth in facts supposed to have been done
a considerable time before. The whole tenor and design of
his discourse assures us of it.

The Zacharias he mentions is not one, whom they of that
age had themselves slain, but rather one of those prophets
whose tombs they built.

The sum of what our Saviour says (if I mistake not) is
this : Ye say, " If we had been in the days of our fathers,
we would not have been partakers with them in the blood
of the prophets." This you say ; but, as hereby you own*
that you " are the children of them that killed the prophets ;"
so by your conduct, by your malice, your pride, your hy
pocrisy, your obstinate disobedience to God, you make it
appear, that you allow the deeds of your fathers, and are
their genuine offspring : you even exceed them in wicked
ness ; you are now filling up, and will still go on to fill up
the measure of their iniquity. I am come among you in my
Father's name, and have done works, which no man ever
did, but you do not hearken to me ; my words you do not
receive, and me you will crucify. God will send among
you, as he did to your fathers, prophets and wise men, to
instruct you in the most excellent doctrine, to admonish and
reclaim you ; but ye will kill and crucify them, scourge
them in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to
city. Hereby you will make the wicked deeds of your fa
thers your own, and bring the guilt of them upon your
selves ; you will hereby deserve, that all the righteous
blood, shed from the foundation of the world, from the
blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zacharias, should
be required of you : and verily I say unto you, " it shall
be required of this generation."

Our Lord seems to me to remind them of instances of
disobedience and cruelty, which they were well acquainted
with, which they avowedly condemned, and pretended to
see the evil of, but yet did, and would imitate in a most

Of Zacharias, the Son of Barachias. 42V

notorious manner ; and bereby would bring- the guilt of
them upon themselves. And the conclusion of all obliges
us to suppose, that the death of the Zacharias he had
mentioned, was an act of cruelty committed by their
fathers. This is the sense of the words in both the evan
gelists.

This appears to me so evident, that if there had been no
event recorded in any of their ancient writings, which an
swered to the death of Zacharias here described ; yet I
should have supposed, that there was some such event that
had happened some time before, and which they were then
well acquainted with.

III. However, we have e a fact recorded in the Old Testa
ment, which exactly answers the words of our Saviour. It
is in 2 Chron. xxiv. 17 — 22. " Now after the death of Je-
hoiada— they left the house of the Lord God of their fathers,
— and wrath came upon Judah and Jerusalem ; yet he sent
prophets unto them to bring them again unto the Lord, ar.d
they testified against them : but they would not give ear.
And the Spirit of God came upon Zachariah, the son of
Jehoiada the priest, which stood above the people, and said
unto them, Thus saith God, Why transgress ye the com
mandment of the Lord ? And they conspired against him,
and stoned him with stones at the commandment of the king*
in the court of the house of the Lord. Thus Joash the king
remembered not the kindness which Jehoiada his father had
done to him, but slew his son ; and when he died, he said,
the Lord look upon it, and require it."

This fact is exactly parallel with that described by our
Lord. (1.) This Zachariah spoke in the name of the Lord,
* the Spirit of God came upon him.' It was suitable to our
Lord's design to instance in the death of a * prophet.'
" Ye say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we
would not have been partakers with them in the death of
the prophets. — -I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and
scribes." Abel was a * righteous man,' and this Zacharias
a < prophet.'

(2.) The place, in which this Zacharias is said to have
been killed, answers the description in the evangelists; he
was slain in the ' court of the house of the Lord,' that is, in
the court of the priests, the inner court of the temple. In
both the evangelists the same place is specified, ' between
' the temple and the altar.' This particular circumstance
of so remarkable an event was, doubtless, handed down to
them by tradition. According to the account in the Chro-
e See Whitby, Matt, xxiii. 36.

422 Credibility of the Gospel History.

nicies, he was in the inner court, when he delivered his
message from God to them : ' He stood above the people.'
The ground of the inner court was raised above the rest ;
he stood at the extremity of that, and spoke to the people
standing in the next court below him : * at the commandment
' of the king' they rushed in upon Zachariah : he retired,
they pursued him, and ' stoned him with stones,' so that he
fell down in the space between the altar of burnt-offerings
and the temple.

(3.) Our Lord subjoins, * whom ye slew.9 The death of
Zacharias, in the Chronicles, was the act of the nation, of
king and people : this particular is added to this instance
with the highest propriety. The death of Abel was the
death of a * righteous man,' but not committed by them :
the death of Zacharias was the act of their ancestors, that is,
of that people to whom our Lord was speaking ; for a nation
is in all ages reckoned the same people. " And he an
swered and said unto them, what did Moses command you ?"
Mark x. 3. " Verily I say unto you, Moses gave you not
that bread from heaven," John vi. 32. " Did not Moses
give you the law ?" Ch. vii. 19. See 22.

(4.) Expressions made use of in the history of Zacharias
in the Chronicles, and by our Saviour in his discourse to
the Jews, put it past doubt, that he intended this fact, and
alluded to this very account in that book. " Behold, I send
unto you prophets and wise men and scribes." The history
in the Chronicles begins thus : " Yet he sent unto them
prophets to bring them again unto the Lord, and they tes
tified against them," &c. It concludes : " And when he
died, he said, The Lord look upon it, and require it." Our
Saviour tells the Jews, ' that the blood of all the prophets
* would be required of that generation.'

(5.) As the fact related in the Chronicles does in all its
circumstances answer that described by our Lord, so there
is a suitableness in the order in which it stands in our Lord's
discourse. Abel is the first * righteous man' slain, and the
death of Zacharias is the last act of cruelty to a * prophet'
related in the Jewish sacred writings.

IV. It ought to be observed, that there is an exact har
mony between the evangelists, in the account they have
given of this discourse of our Saviour, though there is no
reason to think, that one has copied the other. This ought
to satisfy us, that no mistake has been made.

In one particular indeed there is a difference. In St.
Matthew Zacharias is styled the son of Barachias, whereas
in St. Luke's account it is not said who was his father.

Of Zacharias, the Son of Barachias. 423

And in this particular the person, whom our Saviour
speaks of, seems not to answer to him mentioned in the
Chronicles; for there he is called the son of Jehoiada.

There is therefore but one objection against supposing,
that our Saviour meant the Zacharias in the Chronicles :
but it is such an objection as deserves consideration.

It has been observed by f divers learned men, that many
persons among the Jews were called by two names, espe
cially when their true name happened to have some of the
letters of the word Jehovah in it. For this reason Barachias
may have been used for Jehoiada, since likewise these two
names have much the same meaning.

Other learned men suppose, that Barachias was very
early inserted into St. Matthew's gospel by some transcriber.
There is the more reason for this supposition, because it is
wanting in St. Luke. Or else Jehoiada might have been
originally in St. Matthew, but some Christian transcriber,
not well acquainted with the Jewish history, nor knowing
who Jehoiada was, and therefore suspecting that to be a
mistake, might pretend to correct it by putting Barachias
in the room of Jehoiada. Zachariah, the son of Barachias,
whose prophecies form one of the books of the Old Testa
ment, was certainly better known among the Christians than
Zacharias the son of Jehoiada. It is not at all unlikely
therefore, that our not having this name in St. Matthew,
may be owing to the ignorance and rashness of some
transcriber. This supposition seems to be favoured by
what St. Jerom says, who informs us, that in the gospel of
the Nazarenes, Zachariah is called the sons of Jehoiada.

Some have thought, that there is a like instance in Matt,
xiii. 35, where we have these words, " That it might be ful
filled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open
my mouth in parables," &c. The words of this quotation
are in Ps. Ixxviii. 2, the title of which is * Maschil of

* Asaph.' St. Jerom h says, that in some copies of St.
Matthew it was written, * That it might be fulfilled which

* was spoken by the prophet Esaias.' He thinks it was
originally * spoken by the prophet Asaph :' but some tran
scriber, not knowing Asaph to be a prophet, put Esaias in
his room. Afterwards others, perceiving there were no
such words as those which follow here, to be found in
Esaias, left out his name ; and from thenceforward in most

f Vid. Grot, et Whitb. in loc. g In evangelic quo

utuntur Nazareni, pro filio Barachise, filium Joiadae reperimus scriptum. S.
Hieron. Comment. Matt, xxiii. 3.6. h In loc.

424 Credibility of the Gospel History.

copies it was written, " which was spoken by the prophet,
saying," &c.

I crave leave to mention an observation, that may support
the former of these two suppositions, viz. that originally

* the son of Barachias' was wanting in St. Matthew, as well
as in St. Luke. The ancient Christians seem to have been
very much divided in their opinion, who was the Zacharias
here spoken of. Many Christians in St. Jerom's time
thought he was Zacharias the father of John the Baptist;
borrowing this notion (as he1 adds) from some apocryphal
books of no authority. In the copies of St. Matthew's
gospel in his time, he was styled the son of Barachias, as in
ours; but the Nazarene Christians, being Jews by birth, and
understanding the history of their own nation, had it in
their gospel, ' Zacharias the son of Jehoiada.' This indeed
was the truth, but it seems to have been an insertion.

But this is left to the reader, to judge of as he thinks fit.
It is highly probable, that one of these may be the case ;
either that Jehoiada not being well known, Barachias was
put in his room : or else, that * the son of Barachias' was
added.

There being so probable an account of this reading, I
hope there remains no farther scruple about this text.

There is another interpretation of these words, which some
have inclined to, namely, that Zacharias here mentioned is
Zacharias, whose death Josephus has g'iven us the history
of, and that our Saviour spoke of him by way of prophecy.
But as there can be no objection, which I am concerned
with, formed against the evangelists from this sense of the
words, I have taken no notice of it.

Besides, I think it is by no means the true sense of the
place. Whitby observes very well « that Christ speaks here

* of the prophets, whom they had slain, not of one who was

* to be slain a little before the destruction of Jerusalem ;

* for then none of the people could have understood his
' meaning.

By the whole tenor of our Saviour's discourse, the Za
charias he speaks of is excluded from the number of those
that were to be slain. If Zacharias, whom Josephus speaks
of, was as good a man as he represents him, and did faith
fully reprove the wickedness of the prevailing party of his
nation, he might be one of those ' holy and wise men,' whom
our Saviour foresaw would be slain by the Jews : but he
can never be the Zacharias whom our Saviour mentioned

* Comm. in Matt, xxiii. 36.

Of Theudas. 425

by name ; for he is one of those prophets which had
been slain before, and whose blood would be required ot
them.

CHAP, VII.

OF THEUDAS.

IT will be proper in the next place to consider the objec
tion relating to Theudas. The apostles were brought before
the council at Jerusalem, Acts v. 34 — 36. " And when
they took counsel to slay them, Gamaliel commanded to put
the apostles forth a little space; and said unto them, Ye
men of Israel, take heed to yourselves, what ye intend to do
as touching these men. For before these days rose up Theu
das, boasting himself to be somebody, to whom a number
of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was
slain, and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered and
brought to nought. After this man rose up Judas of Gali
lee, in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people
after him : and all, even as many as obeyed him, were dis
persed."

This speech of Gamaliel was made not long after our
Saviour's ascension : Ludovicus Cappellus places it in the
beginning of CaligulaV reign ; Whitbyb and others, three
or four years sooner, in the 20th of Tiberius, A. D. 34. And
Gamaliel here speaks of Theudas, as having given disturb
ance before Judas of Galilee, who in the days of the taxing
drew away much people. This refers doubtless to the as
sessment made by Cyrenius after Archelaus was deposed,
when Judea was reduced to a Roman0 province: which
happened in the sixth or seventh year of the Christian eera..
It was at this time that Judas, whom Josephus calls Judas
Gaulanites, and likewise Judas the Galilean, raised disturb
ances in that country.

But Josephus gives us an account of an impostor called
Theudas, when Cuspius Fadus was procurator in Judea ;
and therefore not before the fourth year of Claudius the

a Spicileg. in Act. v. 36. b Whitby, Par. on this text.

c Jos. Antiq. lib. xvii. cap. ult. 1. xviii. cap. 1. De B. Jud. lib. vii. cap. 8.
sect. 1.

426 Credibility of the Gospel History.

Roman emperor, A. D. 44, that is, seven years after Gama
liel's speech was made, according to Cappellus's computa
tion, and ten years after it, according to Whitby's.

Josephus's words are these : * Whilst Fad us was procu-

* ratorof Judea, a certain impostor, called Theudas, persuaded

* a very great multitude, taking their effects along with

* them, to follow him to the river Jordan : for he said he

* was a prophet, and that, causing the river to divide at his

* command, he would give them an easy passage over. By
' these speeches he deceived many : but Fad us was far from
1 suffering them to go on in their madness ; for he sent out
' a troop of horse, who, coming upon them unexpectedly,

* slew many, and took many prisoners. Theudas himself
' was among the latter ; they cut off his head, and brought
' it to Jerusalem. These things happened in Judea, while

* Cuspius Fadus was procurator.' (i

It may therefore be pretended, that St. Luke has made a
mistake. The Theudas whom Josephus mentions appeared
not till several years after Gamaliel's speech was made:
nor has Josephus said any thing of any other. The person
Gamaliel speaks of, is of the same name ; he likewise

* boasted himself to be somebody,' that is, a prophet : he
was slain, and his followers wrere scattered. In these parti
culars Gamaliel and Josephus agree, therefore they mean
the same person, but they differ most widely about the time ;
for which reason St. Luke must have been mistaken.

Divers solutions have been offered of this difficulty.

1. Some say, St. Luke might put the affair of Theudas
into Gamaliel's speech by way of anticipation. He knew
very well, that Theudas did not appear till after this time :
but this being a very proper instance, and suitable to the
main scope and design of the speech which Gamaliel made,
he inserted it himself. But this is not at all agreeable to
the simplicity of St. Luke's narration, especially consider
ing" how particular he is as to the number of Theudas's fol
lowers : " to whom a number of men, about four hundred,
joined themselves." And one would think Valesius was at a
loss for examples of anticipation, when the only one he pro-

Se rtjg Isdaiag fmTpoirtvovTog, yorjg rig avrjp, Qtvdag ovofictTi, Trti9ti
TOV 7r\ti^ov ox\ov, ava\a(3ovTct Tag Krrjfftig iirtaOai TTpog rov lopdavrjv TroTctfiov
avT<p' 7rpo(j)r)Tr)g yap t\tytv tivai, Kat TTjOOTayjucm TOV TTOTOfiov G%iffag, dtoSov
t(py 7Tcipt%tiv avTOig paSiav* icai ravra Xeywv TroXXag r)7TaTr]Cfev' « \ir\v tia-
fftv avTsg TTjg afypocrvvrjg ovatrOai 3>adog, aXX' t%t7rt[ji\}/tv t\t]v 'nnrewv trr' avrug,
tjTig, aTrpocdoKrjTog tTrnrtcmffa, Tro\\sg p.ev aveiXe, Tro\\sg fo 'favTag t\af3tv'
avrov re TOV QtvSav Z,<i)ypr}GavTt£ aTrortiJivsai rqv KfQaXrjv, KUI KOfjii&ffiv fig
TO. ^iv sv av^avra roig laSaioig Kara rag KVVTTIS 4>a£a rrjg cm*
xpoj>8£, TavTct eyevtTO. Ant. lib. XX. cap. 4. sect. 1 .

Of Theudas. 427

tkices is out of a poet, and that has scarce any resemblance
with this before us.e

2. Some think that Josephus has been mistaken, and has
misplaced Theudas's insurrection. This solution Valesius
prefers before the former, and it is approved likewise by
f Le Clerc. They understand Gamaliel to say, * Before
4 these days,'s that is, a little while ago, * rose up Theudas,
' boasting himself to be somebody.' And if you look far
ther back,h ' before this man (not " after this man," as we

* render it,) rose up Judas of Galilee.' Thus, according

to Valesius, Josephus has not misplaced this event of Theu
das above twelve years ; but according to Mr. Le Clerc,
the error is greater, for he supposes he « rose up' A. D. 28.

But this kind of solutions appears to me perfectly arbi
trary, and not to be untying, but cutting the knot ; and I
freely own I have no right to them. It is very unlikely,
that Josephus should have been mistaken about the time of
that Theudas's insurrection which he gives an account of:
he may have made mistakes in chronology ; but Josephus
is very express here, that this affair happened in the time of
Fadus, when he himself must have been seven years of age.

And in my opinion these learned men give a wrong mean
ing to two expressions in Gamaliel's speech. It is not
necessary to understand those words, * Before these days rose

* up Theudas,' of a * little while ago,' two or three years
before : these common phrases are loose and undetermined
in all languages, and signify sometimes a shorter, at others,
a longer space of time ; and the subject matter of the dis
course, or the coherence of things, or some light from abroad,
can alone determine what the space of time intended is. It

e Alia quoque conciliandi ratio excogitari potest ; si dicamus B. Lucam in
eo loco Kara irpoKri^iv locutum esse. Quae quidem figura occurrit interdum
apud antiques scriptores, exempli causa apud Virgilium, cum dicit :

portusque require Velinos.

Atqui, cum haec dicerentur .ZEneae, nondum condita erat Velia. Vales.
Annot. in Euseb. H. E. 1. ii. c. 11.

f Clerici Histor. Eccl. A. D. 23. n. 60.

g IIpo yap THTWV Td)v »//z6p<i>v avt^t] Qtudag. Quae verba rem nuper ac
novissime factam demonstrant. Vales, ubi supra.

h Sed quoniam Casaubonus negat Graecos unquam ita locutos fuisse, produ-
cendus est testis omni exceptione major. Is est Clemens Alexandrinus, qui, in
lib. vii. Stromat. sub finem, eodem prorsus modo locutus est quo B. Lucas.

Nam Marcion iisdem quidem temporibus vixit quibus Basilides et Valen-

tinus. Verum tanquam senior cum illis adhuc junioribus versatusest. Addit,
deinde, jj.t9' bv 2//Ltwv tTr'oXiyov icripvaffovroc re Fltrpa virrjKnaev. ' Post quern
Simon praedtcantem Petrum audivit aliquamdiu.' Quis non videt in hoc
dementis loco post hunc idem valere atque ante hunc, — sed et geographiae
scriptores, quoties terrarum situm et populorum nomina describunt, eodem
loquuntur modo. Dicunt enim /if ra TZTZQ ticiv aceivoi. Id. ibid.

428 Credibility of the Gospel History.

is said, Acts ix. 22, 23, " But Saul increased the more In
strength, and confounded the Jews which were at Damascus.
— And after that many days were fulfilled, the Jews took
council to kill him." By these " many days" can be meant
but a short space of time, as appears from Gal. i. 17, 18.
St. Paul tells Felix, Acts xxiv. 10, " Forasmuch as I know
that thou hast been of many years a judge unto this nation,
1 do the more cheerfully answer for myself:" though it is
likely, Felix had not then been in Judea above five years.
And yet it might be said very properly, that he had been
there ' many years ;' since in five years time, a governor may
be supposed to gain a good insight into the laws and cus
toms of his province, and the temper of the people ; as also,
because very often governors were removed in a shorter
space of time. When Pilate's soldiers had marched into
Jerusalem with ensigns, the Jews went from thence in a
great body to Pilate at Csesarea, and there made * supplica-

* tions,' Josephus1 says, * many days.' But it appears pre
sently afterwards, that on thek sixth day from their arrival,
Pilate seated himself on his tribunal and granted their peti
tion. So Josephus relates this in his Antiquities : in his
War these earnest supplications continued ' five whole days1
' and nights.'

Thus these phrases, that seem to import a long duration,
are much limited by the connexion of a discourse, or by the
nature of the things spoken of: and other phrases, that de
note ordinarily a shorter duration, must be understood some
times with great latitude. There is an example in Jeremiah,
chap. xxxi. 31, " Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that
I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel."
Ver. 33, " After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my
law in their inward parts." I suppose no one thinks these
promises or predictions were to be accomplished presently.
Porphyry says, ' that many of the ancients had been sup-

* posed to understand the sounds of birds and other animals,
' and Apollonius m of Tyana not long ago.' Apollonius died
before the end of the first century of the Christian aera : Por
phyry was not born till the 232d or 233d year" of the same
sera. Every one must be sensible, with what latitude Por
phyry's ' not long ago ' is to be understood. I place another
remarkable example from Cicero in the margin.0

1 'IictTfiav Troi&fjitvoi tin TroXXag r)p,epag. Ant. 1. xviii. cap. 4. sect. 1.

k Kara iiCTrjv rjfj,epav CIVTOQ BTTI TO j3r}p,a r}Ke. ib.

1 ETTI TTtvTf. 77jU£pa£ (cat VVKTCLQ iffag aKivrjroi SuKctpTtpuv. 1. ii. C. 9. sect. 2.

In 'Qg £7Tt fjiev riov iraXauov 6 MtXa/iTTog, — <cai oi TOIHTOI, s Trpo TroXXs de
AiroXXuvioQ 6 Tivavtvc. Porphyr. de Abst. 1. iii. c. 3. n Vid. Luc.

Holsten. de Vit. et Script. Porphyr. cap. 2. ° Quid ea, quse nupcr,

Of Theudas. 429

I see no necessity therefore of restraining the sense of the
phrase, * before these days,' to two or three years ; it may as
well intend twenty or thirty years : it is plain it does so
here, since it was not till after Theudas that Judas rose up.

Which brings me to the other phrase misunderstood by
these learned men : After this man, /tera TBTO*/. The instances
of the use of this preposition by geographers for a remoter
distance are not to the point, because here it imports time :
and as for Valesius's quotation from St. Clement, I think it
not worth while to consider here, whether he understands it
right or not. At the best, St. Clement's passage is very
obscure and perplexed. St. Luke's phrase is one of the
most common phrases in all the Greek language, and is ever
understood as it is rendered in this place by our translators.
It would be unreasonable to affix a new meaning to a very
common phrase, upon the single authority of one obscure
passage : this is said upon the supposition, that the phrase
in St. Clement was the same with that in St. Luke, and that
the sense assigned by Valesius to St. Clement's passage was
the most likely sense of any. But indeed the phrase in St.
Clement is not the same, and for that reason is of the less
weight here.

I suppose then that our translation is just, and that the
substance of this part of Gamaliel's speech is this : Not long
since rose up Theudas. It might be thirty years or more.
The persons he spoke to knew very well how long. And
after this man, in the time of the celebrated assessment, when
Judea was made a Roman province, rose up Judas of Gali
lee. But these men perished, and their adherents were
scattered.

3. And the solution, already offered by divers learned P
men, of the difficulty under consideration, appears to me
perfectly just. There were two Theudas's in Judea that
were impostors, one before Judas of Galilee, and another in
the reign of Claudius. There is no mistake upon this head
in Josephus, nor in St. Luke, who has given us an exact
and true account of Gamaliel's speech.

It is not at all unlikely, that there should be two impos
tors in Judea of the same name Theudas in the space of
forty i years, and that they should both come to the same

id est paucis ante seculis, medicorum ingeniis reperta sunt ? De Nat. Deor.
1. ii. c. 50.

P Casaub. Exerc. in Baron, ii. n. 18. Grot. & Hamm. in Act v. 36. Bas-
nage Hist, des Juifs, 1. vi. c. 9. sect. 7. edit. 1706.

q The interval cannot be shorter. Josephus's Theudas could not appear
before the year 44. Gamaliel's Theudas rose up before Judas of Galilee, who
made his disturbance in the 6th or 7th year of the Christian sera.

430 Credibility of the Gospel History.

end. These are the two chief difficulties in this matter, and
they may be both cleared up.

(1.) It is not at all strange, that there should be two im
postors in Judea of the name Theudas in the space of forty
years. There were several impostors named Simon. Beside
Simon Magus, mentioned in the New Testament, and often
spoken of by the first Christian writers, there was one Simon
a servant of Herod ; who after his master's death, had the
impudence to set himself up for king, and put r on a diadem.
After a long and obstinate engagement with Gratus, he was
defeated, and his men were dispersed ; he was taken prisoner,
and by Gratus's order his head was cut8 off*. There was
another Simon, son of Judas of Galilee, who was crucified
in the* reign of Claudius by Tiberius Alexander, governor
of Judea after Fadus. There was in the time of Felix one
Simon of Cyprus, who pretended to magic ; I have already
mentioned him in another place."

There were likewise several Judas's who gave disturbance
to this country in a very short time. Judas of Galilee was
a noted person, mentioned here by Gamaliel, and oftentimes
by Josephus ; he rose up in the time of the taxing presently
after the removal of Archelaus. There was v another Judas,
w son of Ezechias, who soon after Herod's death affected
regal authority, and did a great deal of mischief. There
was one Judas, son of Sepphoraeus, a man in great reputa
tion for his skill in the law, who with some others raised a
sedition during Herod's last sickness : he and some of his
confederates x were burnt alive. So that there were three
men of the same name, who in the space of about ten years
raised commotions in Judea.

(2.) Nor is the agreement of character and circumstances
mentioned by Gamaliel and Josephus, a proof they speak
of one and the same person. There are but two particulars
of this sort: that they pretended to be extraordinary persons,
and that they were slain, and their followers scattered or
brought to nought. But in this there is nothing extraordi-

r Hv Be. Kai 2t/twv 8ti\oQ fjiev 'Hpw^a TS fiamXtug — STOQ, apQitQ ry
T(*)v TrpayftaTuv, diadrjfjia re eroX^rjas. TttpiQivQai. Ant. 1. xvii. C. 12. sect. 6.

s TparoQ evTvxwv TTJV KtfyaXriv cnroTtfJivei' Ibid.

1 Ibid. 1. xx. c. 4. sect. 2. u Book I. p. 26.

v letiag 3t rjv E&KIH utog, K. \. Antiq. 1. xvii. cap. 12. sect. 5.

w Archbishop Usher thinks this Judas to be Gamaliel's Theudas. ' For
« whereas Jehudah of the Hebrews is the same with Theudah of the Syrians,
« from whence Judas and Thaddeus [compare Luke vi. 16. with Mark iii. 18.]
' and much rather Theudas, the same name plainly comes. This Judas
« seems to be no other than Theudas, of whom Gamaliel speaks, Acts v. 36.'
Annals, p. 797. x De Bell. 1. i. c. 33. sect. 2—4.

OfTlwudas. 431

nary ; though there had been yet more circumstances in
which they had agreed, this would have been no proof that
one and the same person is spoken of.

Gamaliel says, ' Theudas boasts himself to be somebody,'
and he ' was slain ;' Josephus, that * Theudas said he was a

* prophet,' and ' his head was cut off.'

Josephus has informed us, concerning the Theudas he
speaks of, that he got a good number of people to follow
him to Jordan. Though Gamaliel and Josephus had con
curred in so particular a circumstance as this, (which they
do not,) yet it would not have been a sufficient reason for
our supposing that they intended the same person.

I shall give an instance. Of Simon? above mentioned,
servant of Herod, Josephus says, that he plundered and
burnt the palace at Jericho ; and that he burnt several royal
houses in divers parts, having first given them to be plun
dered by his followers. He says also, that the people with
Simon were chiefly z Peroeans, or people that lived on the
other side of Jordan. Afterwards, even while he is speaking
of affairs that passed in Judea soon after the death of
Herod, he says, that ' at Amatha near Jordan, a royal palace

* was burnt down, by a number of men very much like those
' who were with a Simon.'

If Josephus had omitted this last fact, and some other
historian had related it, together with the name of the leader
of this body of men, and given them their character; which,
if true, must have resembled that of the men with Simon ;
unless the reputation of this historian had been very well
established, it would have been thought that he was mis
taken, and that the person he meant was Simon, though he
called him by another name. A palace burnt down at
Amatha by Jordan ; who could these be but Simon's peo
ple, who, Josephus says, were mostly Pereeans ? Then the
time agrees exactly ; both facts in the absence of Archelaus
from Judea after his father's death. This writer therefore
must have been grossly mistaken, in the name of the person
to whom he ascribes the conduct of this action.

Or, it is not unlikely, that critics might have been divided ;
some would have vindicated Josephus, and some the other
writer ; and yet they would have been all mistaken, unless
they had allowed two different bodies of men, and two dif-

y To tv 'Ifpi^avn (3aai\tiov Trt/iTrpjjtrt Si apTray^e; aywv ra «yKara\£\£i/u-
. Ant. 1. xvii. c. 12. sect. 6. z To re TTO\V ran/ Htpatwi/' ibid.

KareirprjcrOr) Se /ecu ra tin ry lopdavy Trora/zy ev Ajua^otg /3a<ri\«a VTTO
ov-avT<dv avfyjwv 2i/*wvt 7rapair\T)ffHi)v' ibid.

432 Credibility of the Gospel History.

ferent matters to be spoken of, and that both the historians
were in the right.

It is certain, that these impostors about this time had a
resemblance in their pretensions, and their fates : one boasted
he would give his followers a passage over Jordan, as Jo-
sephus's Theudas; another promised his people they should
see the walls of Jerusalem fall down before them, as the
Egyptian impostor. The great scene of expectation was
the b wilderness. But in this they agreed universally,
the company was routed and dispersed, and usually the
leaders executed. This, we may be certain, was the case,
or else the government had been overturned.

These few circumstances then, in which Gamaliel's Theu
das resembles him mentioned by Josephus, are no good
argument, that one and the same person is intended.

Besides, there is one material circumstance in which they
differ. Gamaliel says; " Before these days rose up Theu
das — to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined
themselves." But Josephus says of his Theudas, that he
* persuaded a very great multitude to follow him :' and
that * many were slain, and many taken prisoners.' Jose-
phus's Theudas must have had with him a much larger
company than the former.

(3.) It has been very well observed by Whitby,c that the
ancients generally agreed, there was a Theudas before the
coming of our Lord, though Josephus has taken no notice
of him. Bezad was of opinion, that the Theudas of whom
Gamaliel speaks, did not arise before our Saviour's nativity,
but soon after Herod's death, in that sort of interregnum,
which there was in Judea whilst Archelaus was at Rome.
Which was also archbishop Usher's opinion, as I have
shown before.

It is certain, that this was a time of the utmost confusion.
Josephus has mentioned several by name, who then gave
disturbance in that country; and hinted at mischiefs done
by others, whose names he has not put down. It is plain,
he has past by many more than he has mentioned ; for he
says, * At that time6 there were innumerable disturbances
in Judea.'

Considering all these things, that there had been before

b Matt. xxiv. 26. Jos. Ant. 1. xx. c. 7. sect. 6, 10. et alibi.

on QtvSag Trpo TTJQ ytvgcrfwg Irjffs yiyove TLQ Trapa aaiotQ, /Ji
nva eavTov \eywv. Orig. cont. Cels. p. 44. See more citations in Whitby
upon the place. d In loc.

; e ~Ev TaTtf tie Kai fTtpa /iupia Sropvfiw exopeva Tt]V Ivdaiav
Ant. 1. xvii. c. 12. sect. 4. vid. et de B. 1. ii. c. 4.

Of Theudas. 433

this many pretenders in Judea ; that Josephus has been far
from mentioning- all that rose up in the latter end of Herod's
reign, and in that remarkable time of confusion which suc
ceeded his death ; since there had been in this country, in
a very short time, divers adventurers for power and authority
of one and the same name; and since Theudas f was no
uncommon name among1 the Jews : and since these leaders
of parties and factions very much resembled each other,
and that sometimes in more particulars than those specified
by Gamaliel ; it is not at all unlikely, that there were two
Theudases who were impostors. We may depend upon it
there were ; Gamaliel speaks of one who was before Judas
of Galilee, and Josephus of another in the time of Claudius.

Indeed I am somewhat surprised, that any learned man
should find it hard to believe, that there were two impostors
in Judea of the name of Theudas in the compass of forty
years.s

Batricides, patriarch of Alexandria, about the middle of
the eighth century, supposed that the high-priest Simon,
surnamed the Just, and who according- to other historians11
died about 290 years before the Christian sera, and Simeon,
who took our Saviour into his arms when he was presented
at the temple, were one and the same person, and that he
was then 350 years of age.1 t do not say that these two
mistakes are equal, but the pretence for thus confounding1
two persons is just the same in both these cases, which is
the agreement in name and character. For the high-priest's
name is sometimes written Simeon : he was called the Just;
and the evangelist says, that Simeon was " Just and devout."

f Frequens erat id nomen apud Hebraeos. Itaque non mirum est diversis
temporibus plures extitisse factiosos homines ejusdem nominis. Grot, in loc.

s Duos enim Theudas fuisse, qui se prophetas esse mentiti, alter post alterum
Judaeos ad spem rerum novarum concitaverint, nunquam adduci possina ut
credam. Vales, ubi supra.

h See Prideaux Conn. Part. i. Book 8. year before Christ 292.

1 In septuaginta autem fuit vir, qui nuncupatus est Simeon Justus j is qui

excepit ulnis Dominum nostrum Christum e templo. Produxit autem

Deus ei vitas terminum, adeo ut viveret cccl. annos, et videret Dominum
nostrum Christum. Quern cum vidisset, dixit, Nunc dimitte servum tuum,
O Domine, &c. apud Selden. De Succ. Pontif. 1. i. c. vii.

VOL. I.

434 Credibility of the Gospel History.

CHAP. VIII.

OF THE EGYPTIAN IMPOSTOR.

THERE is yet another particular, in which it has been
thought by some that Josephus contradicts St. Luke. In
ch. xxi. of the Acts of the Apostles, is the account of the
uproar at Jerusalem, when the Jews apprehended Paul, and
would have " killed him." When the chief captain had
taken him from the Jews, and had got him in his own cus
tody, it is said, he put this question to him ; " Art not thou
that Egyptian, which before these days rnadest an uproar,
and leddest out into the wildernessy'oT/r thousand men that
were murderers ?" Acts xxi. 38.

The objection lies against the number here mentioned.
For Josephus, speaking of this same Egyptian, says, ' He
6 gathered together thirty thousand men.'

We have the story twice told in Josephus, in his Anti
quities, and in his History of the Jewish War. I shall set
down Josephus's words, and leave it to the reader to judge,
whether an objection of any weight can be formed against
St. Luke from the account we have of this affair in Josephus.
I shall in the first place transcribe the account in the Jewish
War, because that was first written.

' But the Egyptian false prophet brought a yet heavier
disaster upon the Jews. For this impostor coming into
the country, and gaining the reputation of a prophet,
gathered together thirty thousand men, who were deceived
aby him. Having brought them round out of the wilder
ness up to the mount of Olives, he intended from thence to
make his attack upon Jerusalem, and having beaten the
Roman guard, to bring the people into subjection to him,
and govern them by the help of his armed associates. But

o

7rapctytvofj.tvo£ yap tig TIJV %wpav, avOpuTrog yoqs, Kai TrpoQijTe ra^iv
eaury, Trepi rpKT/iupisc,1 fttv aOpoi&i TOJV ijTrctTripevcjv' TTfptayaywv & avTug SK
TTJQ tprj/ua£ tif TO EXaiwv KaXsfievov opog, tKtiQtv oiof re r\v ctf 'ifpotroXiyja
TraptXQtiv jSiu^effOai, KO.I Kparrjcrag rr/g re 'Piofia'iKijQ 0pspag KOI T& Siipa Tvpav-
vtiv, xpw/itvof TOIQ avvtiffTrtaact dopu^opoig' $0avei ^c UVTH TTJV op/^v

p,era TWV 'Pwjuai/cwv oTrXtrwi/, Kai iraq 6

<rv/w/3o\^c ytvop,tvr)Q, TOV
Oaprjvai Se Kai ZwpyriOrjvai TrXti^ag ra»v ffvv avrty' TO fit \onrov TrXrjQoQ aKtSctffOsV'
iTn ri)v savTMv tKa^ov SiaXaOtiv De Bell. 1. ii. c. 13. sect. 5.

Of the Egyptian Impostor. 435

* Felix coming suddenly upon him with the Roman soldiers,

* prevented the attack ; and all the people joined with him
in their own defence, so that when they came to engage,
the Egyptian fled, followed by a few only. A great num
ber [or, the greatest part] of those that were with him were
either slain, or taken prisoners. The rest of the multitude,
being scattered, shifted for themselves as they could.'

The account he gives of this affair in the Antiquities is
thus : ' About the same time £ he had been speaking of
' some other events in the beginning of Nero's reign] there

* cameb a person out of Egypt to Jerusalem, who pretended

* to be a prophet, and having persuaded a good number of
' the meaner sort of people to follow him to the mount of
' Olives, he told them, that from thence he would let them
' see the walls of Jerusalem fall down at his command, and
' promised through them to give them entrance into the citjr.
' But Felix, being informed of these things, ordered his sol-

* diers to their arms, and marching out of Jerusalem with a
' large body of horse and foot, fell upon those who were
' with the Egyptian, killed four hundred of them, and took

* two hundred prisoners ; but the Egyptian getting out of
' the fight, escaped.'

The reader, if he thinks it needful, may consult the com
mentators, and other writers, whoc have considered this dif
ficulty. Grotius supposes, that they were at first four
thousand, but that at length they increased to the number
of thirty thousand. Valesius reckons there were four thou
sand only that were murderers, or sicarii ; though the whole
company amounted to the number which Josephus mentions.
Whitby thinks, that it is likely the number in Josephus was
originally three thousand. And certainly none of these so
lutions are contemptible. But, for my own part, I think
there is more need of reconciling Josephus with himself, or
at least one of these accounts with the other, than to recon
cile St. Luke with Josephus.

If indeed we had any good reason to think, that the num-

Se TIQ t% AiyvTTTs Kara TSTOV rov icaipov tiq ra
eivai Xeywv, /cat <rv(ji(3ti\ev(i)v TQ STJ^OTIK^ TrXtjOei aw avry irpOQ opo£
TO Trpoffayoptvonivov EXaiu)v tp-%ta6ai — SreXtiv yap, etyacri&v, avroiQ eicti9tv £TTI-
dtiZcu, &>f, KtXtvaavTOQ OVTS, TTITTTOI ra rtav 'IspoffoXvficJv ru^r], Si wv TIJV
ncroSov avroiQ 7rapt%eiv tTT^yyAXero* <&r]\tK St, WQ t-xvQiTO ravra, KtXtvei rȣ
•rpariwrae avaXafaiv ra OTrXa, teat ^era TroXXwv CTTTTEWV re Kat 7re£a>v bp^rjaag
OTTO TOJV 'ifpocroXu/iwv irpoaflaXXei TOIQ Trepi TOV AiyvTTTiov' /cat rerpaKOffis^ fjiev
avTwv aviiXe, diaicoffisg St ZIOVTUQ tXafBtv' 6 fit AiyvTrrtof avrog £ta5pa<ra£ tK
rns ^"X^C atyavriQ tyevero. Ant. 1. xx. c. 7. sect. 6.

c Grot. Whitby in loc. Joseph, p 1075. not. p. Vales. Euseb. Hist. L ii.
c. 21.

2 F2

436 Credibility of the Gospel History.

ber in Josephus was originally three thousand, the disagree
ment would be small. The number of a multitude got
together in a short time, and soon dispersed, might not be
exactly known : the chief captain at Jerusalem might com
pute them at four thousand, and Josephus think they were
but three thousand.

Aldrich has proposed another very ingenious conjecture ;
that originally the number of the whole company in Jose-
phus's War of the Jews was four thousand ; and that the
number of two hundred, said in the Antiquities to be taken
prisoners, was originally two thousand : both which errors
might happen only by a very small alteration.*1

But I choose not to insist upon any of these solutions,
which rely on emendations, made without the authority of
any manuscripts. The numbers in Josephus are at present
plainly faulty. In the first account, he says, they were
thirty thousand in all, and that a great number of these
were either slain or taken prisoners. I might have rendered
the words, the most of them, or, the greatest part of them.
But though 1 have not given them that sense, yet certainly
the four hundred slain, and two hundred taken prisoners,
in the other account, cannot be reckoned a great number,
or a large part of thirty thousand.

But then, as I do not insist on these conjectural emenda
tions for reconciling Josephus with St. Luke ; so, on the other
hand, it would be very unfair, first to take it for granted,
that the number of thirty thousand in Josephus is right,
and then arbitrarily to reform all the other numbers in him,
in order to form an objection against the New Testament.

I think, therefore, there can be no objection brought
against the numbers in St. Luke, from what Josephus lias
said of this affair, because his two accounts are not consist
ent one with another in this point; and that is sufficient.

These were my thoughts concerning this difficulty for
merly. But I have now an observation to offer to the
reader, which I think will not only reconcile St. Luke with
Josephus, but likewise Josephus with himself; and that,
without makjng any alterations in his numbers. This ob
servation has been communicated to me by the truly learned
and accurate Mr. John Ward, professor of rhetoric at
Gresham college.

The history of this impostor seems to lie thus. He came
first to Jerusalem, went from thence into the country, and

d Suspicamur interim pro SiaKoaiyq scriptum olim ^i^iXse, permutatis X &
$, vel etiam A et A. ex rerpa»a<rxiXt«f factum esse TptcrfivpisG ne dubitamus
quidem. Aldr. in Joseph, p. 1075. not. p.

Of the Egyptian Impostor. 437

taking a circuit by the wilderness, returned again to mount
Olivet. In the Antiquities, (which contain the shorter ac
count of this affair,) Josephus mentions only the beginning*
and end of the story, that is, the impostor's coming at first
to Jerusalem, and at last to the mount of Olives ; and drops
the middle part, of which he had given a sufficient account
in the books of the War. The chief captain's < four thousand,'
therefore, were the men carried out of Jerusalem, who were
afterwards6 joined by others in the country to the number
of thirty thousand, as related by Josephus. It is likely
also, that before he left the city, he had so concerted mat
ters with some friends whom he left behind him, as to en
tertain hopes, that upon his return his design would be
favoured by great numbers of Jews in Jerusalem, and that
he should have no opposition from any but the Romans.
But upon his arrival at mount Olivet, finding- the Romans
drawn out to attack him, and the citizens in general pre
pared to oppose him, he did not dare to venture an engage
ment, but presently fled with a body of his most trusty
friends, as is usual in such cases. With these in particular
the Roman soldiers were ordered to engage, neglecting the
rest who were only a confused multitude, and immediately
made off as they could by different ways. When therefore,
Josephus says, the Egyptian fled, accompanied by a few f
only, he is to be understood of that body which at first fled
away with the impostor, and were but a few, with respect
to the whole thirty thousand. When he says, the greatest^
part, or most of those that were with him were slain, or taken
prisoners, which in the Antiquities are said to be four hun
dred killed, and two hundred taken, he means the greatest
part of those few that fled with him. Nor need it be thought
strange, that the number of the slain and the prisoners is
no greater; since, as it seems, Josephus speaks only of that
body of men who fled with the impostor. It is possible,
some of the rest of the multitude might be killed likewise,
though Josephus takes no notice of them ; but it is most
likely not many. For it seems by Josephus, as if only the
Roman soldiers inarched out against them, while the Jewish
people in Jerusalem stood upon their own defence, if any
onset had been made upon them.

Thus then, though there were but four thousand of these
men at first, they might be joined by others afterwards to
the number of thirty thousand. So St. Luke is reconciled

e The words i*ayayuv in St. Luke, and a0pot£« in Josephus, seem very
well adapted to this distinction. f Tov psv AiyvrrTiov <pvyuv per

g AicupQapiivai fie Kai %<Dypr]Qr]vai 7r\£iTe£ rotv aw avry.

438 Credibility of the Gospel History.

with Josephus. And the number, said by Josephus to be
slain, or taken prisoners, might be a great number, or the
greatest part, of that body which fled with the Egyptian
upon the attack made by Felix and his soldiers. Thus
Josephus is reconciled with himself.

But yet I cannot leave the history Josephus has given
us of this Egyptian, without making two or three ob
servations.

1. The chief captain here asks St. Paul, " Art not thou
that Egyptian, which h leddcst out into the wilderness?" —
which seems to imply, since the question was asked in Jeru
salem, that these men, or a good number of them at least,
were drawn out of Jerusalem : and Josephus says expressly
in the latter account, that this impostor came ' out of
* Egypt to Jerusalem ; and persuaded a good number of the
' meaner sort of people, (i. e. who were there,) to follow
' him.'

2. The chief captain speaks of their being " led out into
the wilderness.19 This circumstance Josephus has men
tioned in the first account, where he more particularly
relates their march, and the compass they took, than in the
other.

3. This Egyptian escaped. Josephus has put down this
iu both places, and undoubtedly this is supposed in the
question put to St. Paul by the chief captain. The agree
ment in this particular deserves to be taken notice of, because
it was the common fate of these impostors to perish them
selves, with a good number of their followers.

4. This Egyptian caused this disturbance, according* to
Josephus, when Felix was governor of Judea. This im
postor therefore did not arise any long* time before the seizure
of St. Paul at Jerusalem. He might be still living there
fore ; in this respect there was no absurdity in this question
of the chief captain.

5. Another particular, which we are obliged to Josephus
for, is, that all the people (at Jerusalem) favoured, or joined
with Felix, upon this occasion, in their own defence; that
is, all but some very mean people. If Josephus had not
mentioned this, perhaps it would have been said, since
considerable numbers usually joined these impostors, and
it is likely more favoured them, how was it possible, that
the chief captain should ask Paul, when he saw the whole
city was in an uproar, and the people were ready to tear
him to pieces, " Art not thou that Egyptian ?" that pre
tended prophet, that " before these days rnadest an up-

Of the Egyptian Impostor. 439

roar?" a man of a favourite character at this time among
the Jews !

I think, indeed, that if Josephus had omitted this circum
stance, it would have been a very good reply, to say, that
the chief captain did not yet know what was the matter;
and though there was a loud cry in the multitude, of " away
with him ;" yet the confusion was such, " some saying one
thing," and " some another," that the chief captain had yet
no notion what the case was. However, we have no occasion
to have recourse to this reply. Josephus has told us, that
all the people favoured Felix in his enterprize against this
man ; whether it was because he came from Egypt, or what
was the reason, is of no importance.

6. There is a remarkable agreement between the chief
captain in the Acts and Josephus, in the description they
give of this man. The chief captain says, " Art not thou
that Egyptian ?" And it is observable, that Josephus has
not mentioned this man's name in either of the accounts.
In the first he calls him the Egyptian false prophet, and the
Egyptian : in the other he says, there came one (or a certain
person) out of Egypt: and again, Felix fell upon those
who were with the Egyptian ; but the Egyptian escaped,

We have then in the Acts the exact manner in which the
Jews about this time spoke of this impostor. This is with
me a proof, that St. Luke lived and wrote about this time :
that is, at the time he is supposed to write. We have here
undoubtedly the chief captain's question in the very words
in which it was put. St. Luke must have received this
account from St. Paul, or some one else who was present, if
he was not by himself.

I hope, therefore, that the account which Josephus has
given of this impostor, will be no longer reckoned an ob
jection against St. Luke, but a confirmation of his history.

THE CONCLUSION.

I HAVE now performed what I undertook, and have shown
that the account given by the sacred writers, of persons and
things, is confirmed by other ancient authors of the best
note. There is nothing in the books of the New Testament
unsuitable to the age in which they are supposed to have
been written. There appears in these writers a knowledge

440 Credibility of the Gospel History.

of the affairs of those times not to be found in authors of
later ages. We are hereby assured, that the books of the
New Testament are genuine, and that they were written by
persons who lived at or near the time of those events, of
which they have given the history.

Any one may be sensible, how hard it is for the most
learned, acute, and cautious man, to write a book in the cha
racter of some person of an earlier age, and not betray his
own time by some mistake about the affairs of the age in
which he pretends to place himself, or by allusions to
customs or principles since sprung up, or by some phrase
or expression not then in use. It is no easy thing to escape
all these dangers in the smallest performance, though it be
a treatise of theory or speculation : these hazards are greatly
increased when the work is of any length, and especially if
it be historical, and be concerned with characters and
customs. It is yet more difficult to carry on such a design
in a work consisting of several pieces, written to all appear
ance by several persons. Many indeed are desirous to de
ceive, but all hate to be deceived : and therefore, though
attempts have been made to impose upon the world in this
way, they have never or very rarely succeeded, but have
been detected and exposed by the skill and vigilance of
those who have been concerned for the truth.

The volume of the New Testament consists of several
pieces ; these are ascribed to eight several persons ; and
there are the strongest appearances, that they were not all
written by any one hand, but by as many persons as they
are ascribed to. There are lesser differences in the relations
of some facts, and such seeming' contradictions, as would
never have happened, if these books had been all the work
of one person, or of several who wrote in concert. There
are as many peculiarities of temper and style, as there are
names of writers ; divers of which show no depth of genius
or compass of knowledge. Here are representations of
titles, posts, behaviour of persons of higher and lower rank
in many parts of the world ; persons are introduced, and
their characters are set in a full light ; here is a history of
things done in several cities and countries; and there are
allusions to a vast variety of customs and tenets of persons
of several nations, sects, and religions. The whole is writ
ten without affectation, with the greatest simplicity and
plainness, and is confirmed by other ancient writers of un
questioned authority.

If it be difficult for a person of learning and experience,
to compose a small treatise concerning matters of specula-

The Conclusion. 441

tion, with the characters of a more early age than that in
which he writes ; it is next to impossible, that such a work
of considerable length, consisting of several pieces, with a
great variety of historical facts, representations of charac
ters, principles, and customs of several nations, and distant
countries, of persons of all ranks and degrees, of many in
terests and parties, should be performed by eight several
persons, the most of them unlearned, without any appear
ance of concert.

I might perhaps have called this argument a demonstra
tion, if that term had not been often misapplied by men of
warm imaginations, and been bestowed upon reasonings
that have but a small degree of probability. But though it
should not be a strict demonstration that these writings are
genuine; or though it be not absolutely impossible in the
nature of the thing, that the books of the New Testament
should have been composed in a later age than that to
which they are assigned, and of which they have innumera
ble characters ; yet, I think, it is in the highest degree im
probable, and altogether incredible.

If the books of the New Testament were written by per
sons who lived before the destruction of Jerusalem ; that is,
if they were written at the time, in which they are said to
have been written, the things related in them are true. If
they had not been matter of fact, they would not have been
credited by any persons near that time, and in those parts
of the world in which they are said to have been done, but
would have been treated as the most notorious lies and
falsehoods. Suppose three or four books should now ap
pear amongst us in the language most generally under
stood, giving an account of many remarkable and extraor
dinary events, which had happened in some kingdom of
Europe, and in the most noted cities of the countries next
adjoining to it; some of them said to have happened be
tween sixty and seventy years ago, others between twenty
and thirty, others nearer our own time : would not they be
looked iipon as the most manifest and ridiculous forgeries
and impostures that ever were contrived ? Would great
numbers of persons, in those very places, change their re
ligious principles and practices upon the credit of things
reported to be publicly done, which no man had ever heard
of before? Or rather, is it possible, that such a design as
this should be conceived by any sober and serious persons,
or even the most wild and extravagant?

If the history of the New Testament be credible, the
Christian religion is true. If the things here related to have

442 Credibility of the Gospel History.

been done by Jesus, and by his followers, by virtue of
powers derived from him, do not prove a person to come
from God, and that his doctrine is true and divine, nothing-
can. And as Jesus does here in the circumstances of his
birth, life, sufferings, and after exaltation, and in the suc
cess of his doctrine, answer the description of the great per
son promised and foretold in the Old Testament, he is at
the same time showed to be the Messiah.

From the agreement of the writers of the New Testament
with other ancient writers, we are not only assured that
these books are genuine, but also that they are come down
to us pure and uncorrupted, without any considerable in
terpolations or alterations. If such had been made in them,
there would have appeared some smaller differences at least
between them and other ancient writings.

There has been in all ages a wicked propensity in man
kind, to advance their own notions and fancies by deceits
and forgeries : they have been practised by heathens, Jews,
and Christians, in support of imaginary historical facts, re
ligious schemes and practices, and political interests. With
these views some whole books have been forged, and pas
sages inserted into others of undoubted authority. Many of
the Christian writers of the second and third centuries, and
of the following ages, appear to have had false notions, con
cerning* the state of Judea between the nativity of Jesus
and the destruction of Jerusalem, and concerning" many
other things occasionally mentioned in the New Testament.
The consent of the best ancient writers with those of the
New Testament is a proof, that these books are still un
touched, and that they have not been new-modelled and
altered by christians of later times, in conformity to their
own peculiar sentiments.

This may be reckoned an argument, that the generality of
christians have had a very high veneration for these books ;
or else, that the several sects among them have had an
eye upon each other, that no alterations might be made in
those writings, to which they have all appealed. It is also
an argument, that the Divine Providence has all along
watched over and guarded these best of books, (a very fit
object of an especial care,) which contain the best of prin
ciples, were apparently written with the best views, and
have in them inimitable characters of truth and simplicity.

AN

APPENDIX

CONCERNING THE TIME OF HEROD'S DEATH.

IN all inquiries concerning the chronology of the New
Testament, and particularly concerning the true time of our
Saviour's nativity, and the commencement of his ministry, it
is very needful to take into consideration the time of Herod
the Great's death. Indeed it is very desirable, in the first
place, to settle exactly the date of this event, but to do this
is a very hard task : nor has any one yet been so happy, as
to remove all difficulties, and give universal satisfaction upon
this head.

That none may be quite at a loss in judging of the diffi
culty considered in the third chapter of this book, I shall
here give a brief account of this matter.

The chief opinions at present concerning the time of
Herod's death are these three. Some think he died a little
before the passover of A. U. 750, Julian year 42; others,
on November 25 that same year ; others, a short time before
the passover, A. U. 751.

I. The English reader may see all, in a manner, that can
be said for the second opinion, in Mr. Winston's ' Short
' View of the Harmony of the Four Evangelists,' Prop. 12.
But, though several very learned men have embraced this
opinion, it appears to me a mere hypothesis, without founda
tion : the only ground of it is a Jewish account of their feasts
and fasts, in which that day is noted as a feast, because on
it Herod died ; but that a book appears to be of no authority.

II. That Herod died but a short time before some one of
the Jewish passovers, is evident from Joseph us.b If we
reject entirely his authority, it is in vain to talk about the
time of Herod's death. Archelaus kept a passover in Judea
after his father's death, before he went to Rome ; which he
would not have done if it had not been near. He had good
reason to hasten to Rome ; he had many enemies : Herod
Antipas had been appointed his father's successor in a former

a See Whitby, Annotat. Matt. ii. 23. Lamy, Apparat. Chronol. Par. i. cap.
y. sect. 5. b De Bell. lib. ii. c. 1. Antiq. 1. xvii. c. 9.

444 Credibility of the Gospel History.

will, and he pretended that will ought to take place. When
the Jews at the temple made their demands of Archelaus,
he gave them fair words, that they might not make any dis
turbance and retard his journey,0 he being in haste to go to
Rome; this haste is expressed by Josephus in the War, and
in the Antiquities, in very strong terms. Archelaus, in his
way to Rome, at Caesarea met Sabinus, the emperor's pro
curator in Syria, who was going d in all haste to Jerusalem
to secure Herod's treasure for Augustus. By help of the
intercessions of Varus, president of Syria, (who was then
likewise at Coesarea,) Archelaus prevailed upon Sabinus to
promise, that he would not proceed any farther. But not
withstanding that, when Archelaus was gone away he went
up to Jerusalem, and there ordered all thing's according to
his own will and pleasure. This was all managed without
any orders from Rome. If Herod had been dead two or
three months, they would have had directions from thence
upon this matter; nay, if Herod had been dead one month,
this vigilant procurator would have been at Jerusalem, before
now. I take this to be a kind of demonstration, that, ac
cording' to Josephus, Herod's death happened but a very
short space before some passover.

III. That Herod died a little before the passover, A. U.
750, Julian year 42, is argued in" this manner. His distem
per had made great progress before the pulling down the
golden eagle at the temple. The Jewish rabbies excited
their scholars to this action, * news being brought that
' Herod e was dying? as it is in the War ; f dead, as it is in
the Antiquities. These rabbies were taken up, and carried
to Jericho, where Herod was ; a council was called, and they
were tried. Herod was so ill that he could not stand, and
notwithstanding the new strength? which rage gave him
upon the occasion, he was carried h to the council in a chair.

a irap(i)vv£To \itv p%fao<;, a?r5t%£ro t ri\v aftwav VTTO TI\C, TTtpi
rv\v i£odov £7ra££wc, K. X. De Bell. 1. ii. c. 1. sect. 3. TSTOIQ Ap%tXaof, icanrtp
$£(vwf 0£joa»v ri]V bpjjirjv avrw, eTrewt, t^div rrjv ewi "Pw/jTjf odov avvevBai
TTjoo/csr/m'Tjv avry Ta\o£, CTTI TreptcrKOTrr/ira TWV doZavrwv Ty Kataapt. Ant. 1.
xvii. c. 9. sect. 1.

1 'Y7raj>na£ei d' ev Kaiffaptig, A|0%£\aov Sa/3tvo£, Kaiffapog nriTpoTrog TUV
fv 'Svpiq, TrpayfjiaTWv, ii£ ludaiav wp/j?j^£vo£ (.TCI QvXaicy Tdtv 'HptuOn xpTjjuarwv.
Antiq. ibid. sect. 3. vid. etiam De Bell. ibid. c. 2. sect. 2.

6 Al770?7/Wl(T0»7 KCtl $VT](TKtlV O (3a<Tl\tVC. De Bell. 1. 1. C. 33. S6Ct. 1.

f Kcu oi [if.v TOiuroig Xoyoic; i%i]pav raf vtsg' aQucvtirai KCCI Xoyof ftf avrsg
TtQvavai <t>pa%o}v TOV (SavtXea, KUI avvtirpaTTe roig <ro0i<ratg. Ant. 1. xvii. c.
6. sect. 3. 8 ETTI TSTOIQ 6 (3aai\tvg, di vTrtp(3o\r]v TTJQ opyrjQ

icptiTTwv Trig vocT8 ytvontvoQ, TrpoeiGiv etg tKicXrjcnav, K. X. De Bell. 1. i. c. 33.
sect. 4. h Kai Trapaytvojuevwv, t^tKKXrjaiaffaQ ti£ TO O.VTQ

ividit) KtifjitvoQ aftwajjuq, TS T^vat. Antiq. ibid.

Appendix conceiving the Time of Herod's Death. 445

Soon after this these rabbles were burnt to death, and that
very night1 there was an eclipse of the moon; this eclipse,
according to astronomical computations, happened k the 13th
of March, A. U. 750. After this, Herod grew worse and
worse: it is plain, he could not livelong. The passover1
of this year happened the llth of April. From the 13th of
March to the llth of April, is a sufficient space of time for
all that Joseph us has related concerning Herod's illness, his
settling his affairs, the execution of Antipater, Herod's
death and funeral ; which are the things placed between
the eclipse and Archelaus's coming to Jerusalem at the
passover.

In the War,m Joseph us says, that Archelaus was banished
in the ninth year of his reign : in the Antiquities, that he
was accused before Augustus by the Jews and Samaritans
in then tenth year of his government. In his own Life,
Josephus says, that his father was born in the0 tenth year of
Archelaus's reign. From whence one would be apt to con
clude, that Archelaus reigned nine years complete, and that
the tenth year was current when he was banished. Dio p
places Archelaus's banishment in the 759th year of Rome.
If Herod did not die till the beginning* of A. U. 751, the
ninth year of Archelaus's reign could not be completed in
the 759th year of Rome. But if Herod be supposed to have
died the beginning of A. U. 750, Josephus and Dio agree.
Moreover, Josephus says, that Cyrenius 1 seized Archelaus's
estate, and finished the assessment in Judea in the thirty-
seventh year after the defeat of Antony at Actium by Csesar
Augustus. The victory at Actium was obtained on Sep
tember 2, A. U. 723 ; therefore the 37th year from it begins
Sept. 2, A. U. 759. and ends Sept. 2, 760. Supposing, then,
that Herod died the beginning of A. U. 750, there is in this
particular also a very good harmony between Josephus and
Dio.

There is, however, one great difficulty attending this
opinion. For Josephus has said in two places, that Herod

1 Kai YJ ctXrjvr) de ry avry VVKTI f%t\nrtv. ibid. sect. 4.

k Petav. Doctrin. Temp. 1. xi. c. 1. l Vid. Lamy, App. Chron. p. 58.

m Era TIJG aft^r]g £vva.T(t» 0vya$eyerai juev tig Biewav. De Bell. 1. ii. C. 7.
sect. 3. n Aeicary de em TtjQ apx^C Apx£^a8» °'1 ""pwroi

pamv avm ETTI Kaiffapog. L. xvii. c. 15. sect. 2.

0 Kai [yivtTai] Mar0iag flaaiXevovroQ Apx«Xas TO SticctTov. sect. 1 .

p 'O re 'Hpw^jjg 6 IlaXaiTJji'og, — VTTO Tag A\7T£i£ VTreowoiodr)' Kai
TTJQ ctpxnG CLVTS eSr]fio<ri(i)9r]' I. Iv. p. 567. B.

q Kupfjvioe £e TO. Apx*^«« %p»7/mra airoSopevo£ rjSrj, Kai ruv aTro
7repct£ exsffwv, ai eyevovro rpiaKo<r^> /cat e/S^ojuy erti /wera TIJV Arrwvis ev Aicrty
VTTO Kato-apog. Ant. 1. xviii. c. 2. sect. 1.

446 Credibility of the Gospel History.

reigned thirty-four years after the death of r Antigonus, and
thirty-seven years after he was declared king by the Roman
senate. And he placeth this declaration s of the senate in
A. U. 714, the death of1 Antigonus in the year 717. If
indeed at the beginning of A. U. 750, Herod had reigned
thirty-six years complete from the first date of his reign,
and thirty-three from the latter; so that the 37th of the one
epoch, and the 34th of the other, were to be current at the
time of his death ; then Herod might be said not improperly
to have reigned, with respect to the one, thirty-seven years,
and to the other thirty-four. It is supposed by some learned
men, that Herod was declared king by the senate, u toward
the very end of the year 714 : by others v at the latter end
of October, or beginning- of November ; by others w in Sep
tember or October: by others x about the middle of July
that year. But then, at the beginning of the year 750, Herod
could not have reigned from this date thirty-six years com
plete, nor was the 37th year current. Herod took Jerusalem,
as some? think, in September, A. U. 717; others, about2
the end of June; archbishop Usher,a on the first of January
this year. If the archbishop's supposition could be allowed,
we should have here no difficulty. But if any of the others
are followed, then from this date, of Herod's reign, the taking
of Jerusalem, or the death of Antigonus, (which are all one^)
to the beginning of the year 750, we have not quite thirty-
three years complete, nor is the thirty-fourth current.

In answer to this difficulty it is said b by learned men,
that the years of the Jewish kings were computed from the
beginning of the month Nisan, which usually answers pretty
near to our March. Insomuch, that if a king began to reign
in any part of the year before, even in February, another
year of his reign would begin with Nisan, that is, March.
So Josephus relates, that Jerusalem was taken c by Pompey,
when Antony and Cicero were consuls ; by Herod, when M.

r — TeXevra flaGiXtvactQ a<f>' a fjiev arroKTiivag Avriyovov sKparrjae TCJV TTpay-
fJtaTdJV, f.Tr] r£(7<rapa KO.I rpiajcoa'ra, a$>' a de viro 'Pw^aiair curtdtixBr) (3aai\£vg,
tirra KO.I TptaKovra' de B. J. 1. i. c. ult. sect. 8. Vid. etiam Ant. 1. xvii. c. 8.
sect. 1. s Ant. 1. xiv. c. 14. sect. 5. De B. 1. i.e. 14. sect. 4.

1 Ant. 1. xiv. c. ult. sect. 4. u Alix. de J. C. Anno et Mense

natali. p. 75. v Basnage, ann. Polit. E. Vol. i. p. 17. n. 16.

w Noris. Cenot. Pis. p. 139. Pagi Appar. p. 80.

x Whiston's Short View, p. 150. * Alix. ubi supra, p. 117.

z Whiston, ibid. p. 152. Basnage, ibid. p. 30. n. 9.

a Annals, P. J. 4677.

b Inde etiam anni regum Hebraeorum supputabantur, ita ut si quis rex in
Adar regnaret, a Nisam alter annus imperil ejus inciperet. Reland. Antiq.
Heb. de Temporib. Sacris, c. 1. init. vid. etiam Kepler, de Ann. natal. J. C.
cap. 7. p. 46. c Ant. 1. xiv. c. 4. sect. 3.

Appendix concerning the Time of Herod's Death. 447

Agrippa and Caninius Gal Ins were consuls, ' on the very

* anniversary of the same calamity from Pompey, it having1

* been taken by him on the samed day, twenty-seven years

* before :' though there were but twenty-six years complete
between these two events. And from the taking of Jerusa
lem by Herod to its destruction by Titus, Josephus com
putes e one hundred and seven years, though it was but one
hundred and six complete. But, in my opinion, these in
stances are not home to the point. For in them the year
named is current, whereas, in the case before us, it is not
so. If Herod died in the beginning of the year 750, the
thirty-third and thirty-sixth years of his reign were not com
plete.

IV. Otherf learned men suppose, that Herod died a short
time before the passover, A. U. 751. This they argue from
the number of years assigned to Herod's reign in the places
above mentioned. They do not allow the truth of the Tal-
mudical account of computing the reigns of the Jewish kings
from the beginning of Nisan, or from the passover. If Jo
sephus had followed such a kind of computation, he would
have given some hint of it, in his books written in the Greek
language, and for the instruction of strangers. They say
nlso, that Herod's was a slow, lingering distemper, and that
it is not likely he should die so soon after the execution of
the rabbies and their accomplices, as is supposed by the
patrons of the former opinion. Lastly, they observe the s
agreement of all the other numbers in Josephus, concerning
the dates of the reign of Archelaus and other sons of Herod.

This opinion, however, labours under several very great
difficulties. Dio's account of the removal of Archelaus is
entirely rejected. But to do thish is not very reasonable.
Farther, the supporters of this opinion must allow of the
eclipse above mentioned ; or they must say, it was no real
eclipse, but only some obscurity that was taken for an
eclipse. If they allow the eclipse, then Herod must have
lived a year after the execution of the rabbies, provided he1
died but a few days before the passover, A. U. 751. But

d Ibid. c. 16. sect. 4. e Ibid. 1. xx. c. 9. vid. Kepler, ibid.

f Vid. Lamy, Appar. Chron. Par. i. c. 9. Basnage, annal. Pol. Eccl. Vol.
i. p. 156. n. v. g Note ; the learned men, who espouse the former

opinion, suppose also that Josephus's numbers in all other places agree with
them. h Vid. Noris. Cenot. Pis. p. 147.

1 Quae aptis temporibus tribui non possunt, nisi haec mors contigerit jam
aliquibus mensibus promoto anno U. C. 75 1 , in quo comprobavimus mortuum
fuisse Herodem. Quoquo autem anno mortuus sit, non multis ante pascha
diebus mors ilia obtigit, ut testatur Josephus, cui fidem adhibemus. Lamy,
ubi supra, sect.

448 Credibility of the Gospel History.

it is incredible that Herod should live so long, considering
the description Josephus gives of his distemper. Besides,
it is evident, that the mourning of the Jewish people for the
rabbies, at the passover next after Herod's death, wask very
fresh, which it could not have been, if the rabbies had been
dead above a year before. Moreover, it is evident, that He
rod's ambassadors were sent away to Rome, to know Augus
tus's pleasure concerning Antipater, some l time before the
disturbance at the temple, when the golden eagle was taken
down. And it is very plain, that Herod lived not™ many
days after the arrival of the ambassadors. So that, accord
ing to this opinion, these ambassadors must have spent above
a year in their journey from Judea to Rome and back again,
though they were sent upon very pressing business, which
is also incredible. Or they must reject the account of the
eclipse, and say, as Lamy n does, that it was only a paleness
or obscurity, which was no real eclipse of the moon ;
which, I believe, will appear very unreasonable to all
astronomers.

These are the three principal opinions concerning the
time of Herod's death : and these the main arguments for,
and objections against them. I presume it appears to the
reader, from particulars alleged from Josephus and Dio,
that Herod did not die before the year 750, nor survive the
year 751 : and that he died a short time before the Jewish
passover of one of these years. It follows, that if Herod died
in 750, he died three years and nine months before the vul
gar Christian sera, which commences January 1, A. U. 754 :
if at the time above mentioned, in the year 751, then he died
about two years and nine months before the said eera.
Which is the truth, I arn not able to determine.

ro irevQoQ UK vTrezaXpevoVt a\V ot/xa>yat Siarrpvffioi, K

KOTTSTOl TS TT£QiriX8VTl£ 0\T)V TT]V TToXtV. De B. 1. li. C. 1. SCCt. 2.

Vid. et Ant. 1. xvii. c. 9. sect. 1.

1 De B. 1. i. c. 32. fin. Ant. 1. xvii. c. 5. fin.

m De B. ibid. c. 33. sect. 7, 8. Ant. ibid. c. 7. &c. 8. sect. 1.

n Ubi supra, sect. 6.

END OF THE FIRST PART.

THE

CASE OF THE DEMONIACS

MENTIONED IN THE

NEW TESTAMENT:

FOUR DISCOURSES UPON MARK V. 19.

WITH AN

APPENDIX,

FOR FARTHER ILLUSTRATING THE SUBJECT.

[FIRST PUBLISHED IN MDCCLVIII.j

PREFACE.

THESE discourses were preached to a small but attentive
audience, in 1742. In the year 1737, were published by a
learned author, ' An Enquiry, and a Further Enquiry, into
4 the meaning of Dsemoniacs in the New Testament/ But
as the subject had much employed my thoughts, and the
plan had been drawn up a good while before, I did not dis
cern any sufficient reason for laying it aside.

The publication of these discourses has been often de
sired by divers of those that heard them, and by others.
They who know how I have been engaged, need not be
told the reason of the delay. They might have been put
into one continued dissertation, but then the practical ob
servations must have been struck out ; which I was unwil
ling to have done. And in their present form they must
remain, for a while at least, a monument, that any subject,
tending to illustrate the scriptures, may be treated in Chris
tian assemblies, if it be done with modesty and discretion.

These Discourses, with the Appendix, may be reckoned
a Supplement to the first part of the Credibility of the Gos
pel History.

MARCH 15th, 1758.
VOL. I. 2 G

450 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

DISCOURSE I.

MARK v. 19.

Howbeit Jesus suffered him not, but saith unto him, Go
home to thy friends, and tell them, how great things the
Lord hath done for thee, and hath had compassion on
thee.

IT is now some years since I explained and improved, as I
was able, the history of our Lord's miracles, recorded in the
gospels. I think that very few were entirely omitted, which
are particularly related, except this in the country of the
Gadarenes. And I always intended to consider this like
wise, though it has been long deferred. As life, through
the Divine goodness, is still preserved, I propose now to
consider this history, which, with some few differences only,
is found in three several evangelists, Matt. viii. 28 — 34 ;
Mark v. 1—20; Luke viii. 26—39.

I. In the first place, I shall consider distinctly this whole
narration, comparing together the several evangelists as
we go along.

II. After which I intend to make some remarks upon this
miracle, and the history of it.

I. In the first place, I shall distinctly consider the whole
of this narration, comparing the several evangelists as we
go along.

The time of this miracle may be in some measure per
ceived by the connexion : in all the three evangelists, it is
preceded by an account of our Lord's crossing the sea of
Galilee, with his disciples, and laying a tempest, which
they had met with in their passage.

St. Luke had before given an account of divers of our
Lord's discourses, ch. viii. 19, 22, 26, " Then came unto
him his mother, and his brethren, and could not come at
him for the press. — Now it came to pass on a certain day,
that he went into a ship with the disciples. And he said
unto them, Let us go unto the other side of the lake. —
And they arrived at the country of the Gadarenes, which is
over against Galilee."

St. Mark also, having related divers of our Lord's dis
courses, says, " And the same day, when even was come,
he saith unto them, Let us pass over unto the other side.

Of the Demoniacs mentioried in the New Testament. 451

And when they bad sent away the multitude, they took him
even as he was in the ship. And there were also with him
other little ships. And there arose a great storm of wind,
and the waves beat into the ship, so that it was now full.
And he was in the hinder part of the ship asleep on a pil
low ; and they awoke him, — And he arose and rebuked the
wrind. And the wjnd ceased, and there was a great calm.
— And they feared exceedingly, and said one to another,
What manner of man is this, that even the winds and the
sea obey him? And they came over unto the other side of
the sea, into the country of the Gadarenes." That is, our
Lord passed from the western to the eastern side of the sea
of Galilee, or of Tiberias, as it is called at other times.

St. Matthew calls the place where our Lord arrived, " the
country of the Gergesenes :" whereas the two other evan
gelists, as we have just seen, call it "the country of the
Gadarenes." Some learned men think, that this last is the
right reading in St. Matthew's gospel also.

tt follows in St. Mark, whose history we shall for the
most part take for our text, and cite in the first place :
" And when he was come out of the ship, immediately there'
met him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit."
From which words, I think, it may be concluded, that this
man's abode, and the burial-place, where he chiefly was,
lay near the shore, or upon the sea-side. St. Luke's words
confirm this supposition, which are these: " And when he
went forth to land, there met him out of the city a certain
man, which had devils long time."

But here is a difference between St. Matthew and the two
other evangelists. St. Mark says, " Immediately there met
him a man with an unclean spirit." St. Luke, " A certain
man, which had devils." But St. Matthew says, " There
met him two possessed with devils, coming out of the
tombs." Of this difficulty several solutions have been
offered by learned interpreters of scripture. The most
likely seems to be this, that one of these men was upon di
vers accounts more remarkable than the other: he, especially,
may have been " exceeding fierce," and his distemper of
the longest standing. Perhaps he was best known in those
parts, being an inhabitant of the city not far off. He like
wise was the person with whom our Lord discoursed
chiefly, asking him his name, and receiving for answer, that
he was called Legion. It is likely, that one only desired
to accompany the Lord Jesus when cured : and, possibly,
he only of the two had a grateful sense of the benefit con
ferred, and afterwards declared, " how great things the

2 o 2

452 ' Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

Lord had done for him." There being therefore several
things peculiar to one, two of the evangelists speak of him
only, omitting the other, for the sake of brevity : but there
is no contradiction between them and the third evangelist.
There were two, as St. Matthew says : which is not denied
by St. Mark or St. Luke, though they confine their relation
to one only.

Says St. Mark, " Immediately there met him out of the
tombs a man with an unclean spirit, M ho had his dwelling
among the tombs." St. Luke, " Neither abode in any house,
but in the tombs." St. Matthew, " There met him two
possessed with devils, coming out of the tombs.

This circumstance therefore is mentioned by all the three
evangelists ; that this man, or these two men, had their
abode in tombs, or among tombs. It was not then usual to
bury within the walls of cities, but at some distance without
them, more or less. By tombs may be meant in general a
burying-place, where were many sepulchres; or by tornbs
may be meant sepulchres. And indeed many of the sepul
chres of the eastern countries at that time were large, capable
of containing divers persons. And to this day, travellers,
Avhen overtaken by storms and bad weather, take shelter
in them.

These men then being fierce and melancholy, shunning
company and being shunned, abode at a distance from all
cities, and particularly ' among 'or 'in sepulchres.' This
place suited their gloomy apprehensions, and here in the
night season and in bad weather they had shelter. More
over, there might be another reason of this. For some are
of opinion that the daemons, or unclean spirits, by which
these persons were possessed, were not supposed to be fallen
angels, but the souls or departed spirits of bad men. If so,
a lunatic, acted by such spirits, or thinking himself acted
by them, might be much disposed to be chiefly among the
dead, or in burial-places. But whether there be any ground
for that opinion or not, it is likely, the two reasons before
mentioned ought not to be disregarded : these places
suited their melancholy apprehensions, and here at some
seasons they had shelter and relief from rain and cold.

There follows in the evangelists a description of the un
happy circumstances of one or both these persons. Says
St. Mark, who is most particular : " And no man could bind
him, no not with chains : because that he had been often
bound with fetters and chains, and the chains had been
plucked asunder by him, and the fetters broken in pieces.
And always night and day he was on the mountains, and in

Of the Dcemoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 453

the tombs, crying, and cutting himself with stones." St.
Luke's account is : " There met him out of the city a certain
man, which had devils long time, and wore no clothes, neither
abode in any house, but in the tombs." And afterwards:
" For oftentimes it had caught him. And he was kept,
bound with chains, and in fetters. And he brake the bands,
and was driven of the devil into the wilderness," or the
desert, mountainous country, where the tombs were situated.
St. Matthew more briefly says, " There met him two pos
sessed with devils, coming out of the tombs, exceeding
fierce, so that no man might pass that way."

The sum is, that this was a deplorable case. One of these
men, especially, had been in this condition, of a discomposed
mind, for a long season. He was exceeding fierce and
dangerous at some times. He had been fast bound, but he
had broken his bands, escaped out of his confinement, and
had been for some while in desert, mountainous places,
lodging in sepulchres only, not in any house. All which
are evident symptoms of lunacy or distraction. That is the
unhappy case before us.

Possibly it may be here inquired by some, how came the
evangelists, especially Mark and Luke, who are most par
ticular, to be so well acquainted with the history of this
man's case in time past, to be able to say, " he had been so
long time," and that he had been " often bound with chains,
and that they had been broken asunder by him * " His
present circumstances and actions, his nakedness, his fierce
ness, his cutting himself with flints, his crying, or raving, as
he did, were discerned immediately. These things the dis*.
ciples were eye or ear-witnesses of, upon the man's approach
ing them, when they came out of the ship. But how came
they to know the circumstances of his indisposition in time
past, and the treatment that had been given him?

To which 1 answer, that it is easy to suppose divers things,
which are not mentioned in relations of this kind : which
therefore are omitted, because all intelligent and attentive
persons are able to supply them. It is not unlikely, that the
man himself, when cured by our Lord, gave some account
of his former condition. Moreover, here were the keepers
of the swine, who might be able to relate several things
concerning him. Possibly too it was a well known case,
and the people who came over with Jesus from the other
side of the lake, might be able to give the disciples some
information concerning him.

Finally, before our Lord went away, great multitudes of
that country had come to the place where Jesus was. And

454 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

it is reasonable for us to conclude, that some of those persons
were able and disposed to give an account of both these men,
especially of one of them; which indeed, as before hinted,
I take to be a main reason, why the evangelists Mark and
Luke confined their history to one, though there were two
of these men, as said by St. Matthew : even because they
had received more particular intelligence concerning one
than the other.

It follows in St. Mark : " But when he saw Jesus afar
off, he ran and worshipped him. And cried with a loud
voice, and said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou
Son of the most high God. I adjure thee by God, that thou
torment me not. (For he had said unto him, Come out of
the man, thou unclean spirit.) And he asked him, What is
thy name ? And he answered, saying, My name is Legion,
for we are many. And he besought him much, that he
would not send them away out of the country." St. Luke
likewise says : " When he saw Jesus he cried out, and fell
down before him, and with a loud voice said, What have I
to do with thee, Jesus thou Son of God most high. I be
seech thee, torment me not. (For he had commanded the
unclean spirit to come out of the man.) And Jesus asked
him, saying, What is thy name ? And he said, Legion,
because many devils were entered into him. And they
besought him, that he would not command them to go out
into the deep." St. Matthew^ though briefer than the others,
says: " And behold, they cried out, saying, What have we
to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God ? Art thou come
hither to torment us before the time ?"

By all the evangelists we are assured, that one, or both
these men, either they, or the evil spirits in them, owned our
Lord's character, as the Messiah, or the Son of God ; and
they entreat him not to send them away. But I think it
appears, both from St. Mark and St. Luke, that these things
are not said by them until our Lord had signified his will
that the man, or men, should be delivered from this unhappy
circumstance : then they own the character of Jesus, that
he was the Christ, and his power, as such, to command and
send them whither he pleased. But they entreat him, not
to punish them for having taken possession of these persons,
and made them miserable. Yea, they are represented com
plaining- of his command as unreasonable : " What have we
to do with thee?" Why should you concern yourself with
us? Leave us to act as we think fit, until the last day, the
time of the full punishment allotted to us.

The unclean spirits speaking in this manner, Jesus asked

Of the Dcemoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 455

one of the men, what was his name, and he answered, Legion,
because there were in him many unclean spirits.

As these spirits desired, that they might not be " tor
mented before the time ;" so in particular, they petitioned
our Lord, that he would " not send them away out of the
country," as it is expressed in St. Mark : or, that he would
" not command them to go out into the deep," as in St.
Luke.

Evil spirits delight in mischief, and are afraid of punish
ment. They therefore make it their request to Jesus, if he
would be obeyed with regard to the commandment he had
given them, to come out of the men whom they had so long
tormented, that yet he would not require them quite to leave
that country, but permit them to act as they pleased toward
some other persons in those parts. At least they entreat
him, however, that he would not order them away into the
deep, or the abyss, that is, the place of torment.

As the full punishment a of fallen angels, as well as of
bad men, was deferred to the great day of the general judg
ment ; it was the opinion of many at that time, that some of
those evil angels and spirits were allowed (though subject
to control) to visit the region of our air, and this earth,
and to inflict diseases and other calamities upon men. Of
this number are these unclean spirits, and they earnestly
entreat not to be sent back to their prison and confined in
the abyss, or place of torment, as yet.

I proceed to what remains, now first reading St. Mat
thew : " And there was a good way off from them an herd
of many swine feeding. So the devils besought him, saying,
If thou cast us out, suffer us to go into the herd of swine.
And he said unto them, Go. And when they were come
out, they went into the herd of swine. And behold, the
whole herd of swine ran violently down a steep place into
the sea, and perished in the waters. And they that kept
them fled, and went their ways into the city, and told every
thing, and what was befallen to the possessed of the devils.
And behold, the whole city came out to meet Jesus. And
when they saw him, they besought him, that he would de
part out of their coasts. And he entered into a ship, and
passed over, and came into his own city."

Here I would observe, that this great work of our Lord
was performed with deliberation. There was some time be
tween his intimation, that these evil spirits should remove,
and their actual departure ; or, in other words, the men
were not healed at once, immediately upon his command-
a See 2 Pet. ii. 4. and Jude ver. 6.

456 Suppkment to the First Part of the Credibility.

ing the evil spirits to come out of the men : but he allowed
a petition to be presented to him, which was in part granted.

St. Mark's account is after this manner : " Now there was
there nigh unto the mountains a great herd of swine feeding'.
And all the devils besought him, saying, Send us into the
swine, that we may enter into them. And forthwith Jesus
gave them leave. And the unclean spirits went out and en
tered into the swine. And the herd ran violently down a
steep place into the sea, (they were about two thousand,) and
were choaked in the sea. And they that fed the swine fled,
and told it in the city, and in the country. And they went
out to see what it was that was done. And they came to
Jesus, and see him that was possessed with the devil, and
had the legion, sitting, and clothed, and in his right mind,
and they were afraid. And they that saw it, told them, how
it befell to him that was possessed with the devils, and also
concerning the swine. And they began to pray him to de
part out of their coasts."

St. Luke's relation is to the like purpose : " And there
was there an herd of many swine feeding on the mountain.
And they besought him, that he would suffer them to enter
into them. And he suffered them. Then went the devils
out of the men and entered into the swine. And the herd
ran violently down a steep place into the lake, and were
choaked. When they that fed them saw what was done,
they fled, and went and told it in the city, and in the coun
try. Then they went out to see what was done, and came
to Jesus, and found the man, out of w7hom the devils de
parted, sitting at the feet of Jesus, clothed, and in his right
mind; and they were afraid. They also which saw it, told
them by what means he that was possessed of the devils was
healed. Then the whole multitude of the country of the
Gadarenes round about besought him to depart from them,
for they were taken with great fear. And he went up into
the ship, and returned back again."

As this country was a part of the land of Israel, and the
Jews were forbidden by the law of Moses to eat swine's
flesh ; it may seem strange to some, that there should have
been in this place so large a number of those animals. But
there is reason to think, that this country was then chiefly
inhabited by Gentiles, though there were Jews likewise;
and it may be supposed, that the herd belonged to the
Gentile inhabitants. However, possibly some Jews might
have a property in them, and might trade in those crea
tures, selling them to heathens, without partaking of them
as food.

Of the Damoniacs mentioned in the Neiu Testament. 457

The evangelists do all agree in this part of the history.
But two inquiries may be here put. 1. By what means
was this herd of swine hurried down the precipice, and
drowned in the waters? 2. For what reasons did our Lord
suffer this to be done ?

First, How, or by what means was this herd hurried down
the precipice, and drowned in the waters ? And there are
several ways of accounting for this. They who suppose
that there was here only a distemper, and are unwilling to
admit the agency of any bad spirits in this case, say, these
men, or one of them, might, with the permission of Jesus, go
and drive the swine off the precipice into the sea, where
they were drowned. Or else, our Lord was pleased to
transfer the lunacy, or distraction, from this man, or these
men, to the swine; and the distemper having seized them,
they took their way down a steep road, and perished in the
sea.

J Others, who readily admit the agency of evil spirits in
this affair, say, that with our Lord's permission, when these
spirits were removed out of the men, they took possession of
the swine, and hurried them into the waters, where they were
drowned.

Every one is at liberty to judge for himself. But I
readily own, that I do not approve of that solution, which
supposeth, that the lunacy was transferred from the men to
the swine ; for this implies, that the drowning of the swine
was owing to our Lord's agency or interposition : whereas
I do not perceive, that our Lord wrought any miracles that
were hurtful. The only instance of this kind which I re
collect, is the withering a barren, useless tig'-tree in the way
between Bethany and Jerusalem. As then there is no clear
evidence of our Lord's interposing in this matter, I presume
it ought not to be admitted.

Secondly, it is inquired : Why, or for what reasons did
our Lord suffer this to be done? by the men themselves
before they were quite cured ; or by the evil spirits when
they were departed from the men ? For according to the
accounts given by the evangelists, it was not, and could not
be done without his permission : his leave was asked and
granted.

Some think, that our Lord permitted this to be done, as a
proof of the real agency of evil spirits, in this case.

But whether that was a reason or not, there are, I think,
other uses which this event would answer, and therefore
probably were intended herein. For the loss of the swine
tended to make the cure of the man public. It had this

458 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

effect : " They that fed the swine fled, and told it in the
city, and in the country ;" that is, they hasted to noise it
abroad every where : and many were brought to Jesus, and
came to see the man who was healed, and stayed with him,
sitting1 at his feet. Hereby, therefore, and by means of the
immediate publication of the miracle, the people of the
neighbouring town and country wereb proved. Jesus, by
his presence with them, and by the great miracle performed
among them, with which- they were presently acquainted,
made them a tender of divine knowledge, and other spiritual
blessings. But though a great and evident miracle had
been wrought among them, one of the most desirable works
that can be thought of, delivering a man from distraction,
restoring him to the use of reason and understanding; these
people were so carnal, and so apprehensive of suffering in
their worldly interests, that instead of entreating Jesus to
stay with them, a while at least, that they might partake in
some other like benefits of his great power, and be instruct
ed by him in things of religion, that they joined together
with much unanimity in beseeching him to depart out of
their coasts : which he did, and went back again to the other
side of the lake.

There remains yet one article in this history, omitted
indeed by St. Matthew, but related by both the other evan
gelists. Says St. Mark: " And when he was come into the
ship, he that had been possessed with the devils, prayed
him, that he might be with him ; Howbeit, Jesus suffered
him not, but saith unto him, Go home to thy friends, and
tell them, how great things the Lord hath done for thee,
and hath had compassion on thee. And he departed, and
began to publish in Decapolis, how great things Jesus had
done for him, and all men did marvel." St. Luke's words
are these : " Now the man out of whom the devils were
departed, besought him, that he might be with him. But
Jesus sent him away, saying, Return to thy own house, and
show how great things God hath done unto thee. And he
went his way, and published throughout the whole city,
how great things Jesus had done unto him."

It is likely, that this person requested to be with Jesus
for his own security, fearing that those evil spirits would
again take possession of him and torment him. But Jesus
suffered him not to be with him. For our Lord to have

b Non quod concesserit Salvator daemonibus quod petebant, dixit, Ite : sed
ut per interfectionem porcorum hominibus salutis occasio prseberetur. Pastores
cnim, ista cernentes, statim nuntiant civitati. Hieron. in Matt. Tom. 4,
p. 29. m.

Of the Demoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 459

allowed the man to accompany him in his journeys would
have looked like ostentation, and might have been esteemed
vain-glorious ; besides, the power of Jesus was more con
spicuous in the man's safety at a distance. And it was fit,
likewise, that this person should now increase in faith, and
live without fear, trusting in God every where, and at all
times.

His request not being granted, " he went his way, and
published throughout the whole city, how great things
Jesus had done unto him." He was an honest and grateful
man ; and in the place where he dwelt, and every where,
and to all men, as he had opportunity, he declared the
great work which Jesus had done for him.

Perhaps some may here inquire ; How shall we reconcile
the direction given by Christ upon this occasion with what
we find elsewhere? Sometimes he commanded silence, and
charged men not to speak of the miracles he had wrought.
Here he directs this man to tell others what " God had done
for him." To which I answer: Our Lord never desired,
that any miracles wrought by him should be denied or dis
owned by any ; nor did he intend that men, on whom they
were performed, should conceal them from their friends and
relatives, or their own family ; though he did forbid a
general and open publication of some of his mighty works.
And what he says to this man is no more than this: " Re
turn to thy own house; or, go home to thy friends; and
tell them, how great things the Lord has done for thee, and
has had compassion on thee."

II. Having gone over this history, I would now add some
remarks and observations.

1. We hence perceive that St. Mark's gospel is not an
abridgment of St. Matthew's, as some have thought. St.
Mark entirely omits divers things recorded by St. Mat
thew, and he has some histories quite wanting in that other
evangelist. This history, which we have now considered,
affords a good argument against that opinion : St. Matthew
speaks of two in this country of the Gergesenes possessed
with devils, St. Mark mentions one only. If he had seen
St. Matthew's gospel, he would not have so written this his
tory, without assigning some reason for the difference, or
inserting a hint for reconciling it. St. Mark says, " the
number of the swine was about two thousand," which is not
mentioned by either of the other evangelists. St. Mark is,
besides, in several parts of his relation of this miracle,
more full and copious than St. Matthew, who has nothing
of the discourse which our Lord held with the man called

460 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

Legion ; and also entirely omits the man's request, when
cured, to be with Jesus, and our Lord's refusal, and the pub
lication which the man afterwards made every where, of
the great cure which had been wrought upon him.

In a word, the first three evangelists are all distinct and
independent witnesses of our Lord's life and miracles ; they
did not write by concert : nor had any one of them, when
he wrote, seen either of the other two gospels. The case
however is somewhat different with regard to St. John : he
perused the other three gospels before he wrote, and he has
both confirmed their history, and made additions of his own.

2. The distemper, with which these men were afflicted,
was lunacy or distraction : I say, the distemper of this man,
or these two men, (whatever influence evil spirits might
have,) was lunacy or distraction. This is evident from par
ticulars mentioned by all the evangelists. St. Matthew
says, that the two men which met Jesus upon his coming
on shore, were " exceeding fierce, so that no man might pass
that way." The particulars related by the other evangel
ists, concerning one of these men, are indications of the
same thing : his having been bound and fettered, and his
breaking his bands, living in the tombs, without clothing,
cutting himself with flints; as also the whimsical answer
which he made, when our Lord asked what was his name.
And the cure is represented by his recovering his reason
and understanding, and a composed temper and behaviour :
for it is observed, that when the people came out of the city,
they saw him " sitting, and clothed, and in his right mind."

3. This is the only miracle of this kind which is particu
larly recorded in the gospels. There might be many others ;
but I do not recollect any other particularly related by the
evangelists. There are divers instances of persons who had
evil spirits, and were lunatic; but their distemper was not
the same with that of these men. The young man brought
to the disciples, when our Lord was in the mount, was lu
natic and sore vexed ; but his distemper was the epilepsy,
or falling sickness: "Oft-times," it is said, Matt. xvii. 15,
" he falleth into the fire, and oft into the water:" and other
symptoms of that distemper are to be found in the history
of his case.

Of Mary Magdalene it is said, that " out of her went
seven devils," Mark xvi. 9; and I am not unwilling to allow
her case to have been much the same with that of the two
men at the tombs : though it is not quite certain. But her
cure, or the miracle wrought upon her, is no where par
ticularly related : all that is said of her case is no more than

Of the Demoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 461

this, Luke viii. 1,2; " And the twelve were with him, and
certain women which had been healed of evil spirits and
infirmities : Mary Magdalene, out of whom went seven
devils, Joanna, and many others."

4. The miracle, which we have now considered, was the
effect of our Lord's benevolence. It does not appear, that
he had any invitation to come into the country of the Gada-
renes ; but he went thither of his own accord, with a view
of healing the two men at the tombs : knowing* their sad
case from some occasional informations that had been given
him, or by the perfect comprehensive knowledge which he
had of things remote, as well as near at hand.

The context which was read before assures us, that com
passion and benevolence, without any particular invitation,
brought our Lord hither : his words therefore are extremely
proper, when he says to the man : Go home to thy friends,
and tell them, how great things the Lord has done for thee,
and has had compassion on thee." Unasked, unsought by
friends or any one else, he crossed the sea, and came on shore,
conversed with these unhappy persons, relieved them in their
deplorable and disconsolate condition, and then went back
again to the other side.

How conspicuous is the benevolence, how great and
amiable is the benignity, of the Lord Jesus ! He is entitled
to the esteem and love of all. He came to seek and to save
those who were lost. And by mighty works of goodness
on the bodies of men, or for rectifying and putting in
order the human frame, as constituted of soul and body, he
demonstrated the truth of his prophetical character and
mission, and invited men to embrace and obey that doctrine
which directs them in the way to the possession of eternal
life.

"That word ye know," says St. Peter at the house of
Cornelius, " how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the
Holy Ghost and with power : who went about doing good,"
Acts x. 37. They who were afflicted, as these men were,
could not be easily brought to Jesus : and it is likely, that
few had faith enough to ask such a cure of him, especially
at a distance. Our Lord therefore, as when Lazarus was
dead, now also of his own good-will left the place where he
was, took shipping, and went over the sea of Galilee, for
the sake of these men in the country of the Gadarenes,
whose case was extremely deplorable, and above all human
relief.

5. I would observe, that this miracle was very public,
at least well known. Our Lord went to this place attended

462 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

by his disciples ; as he came out of the ship the two men
met him. Some of the mariners therefore belonging to that
ship, in all probability, were present at the miracle, for the
appearance of such miserable objects could not but excite
their curiosity. It is probable that divers others were spec
tators of this great cure. St. Mark proceeding to this mat
ter says, ch. iv. 35, 36, " And the same day, when the even
was come, he saith unto them, Let us pass over unto the
other side. And when they had sent away the multitude,
they took him, as he was, in the ship. And there were also
with him several other little ships." All these, it is likely,
followed Jesus, and came on shore with him on the other
side. Moreover, as before observed, our Lord performed
this miracle deliberately: he discoursed with one of the men,
who, by the answer he made, as well as by his outward form,
manifested the great disorder of his mind. And this part
of that country must have been extremely desolate and un
peopled, if some passing by, and others, did not in this
space of time join our Lord's company. There is therefore
reason to conclude, that a good number of persons were
gathered together from the ships, and from elsewhere, and
were spectators of this great work. So much is intimated
in those words of St. Mark : " And they that saw it told
them, how it had befallen him that was possessed with the
devils."

Then indeed it was very public : for upon the cure, and
the loss of the swine, they who fed them went into the neigh
bouring city : and the people came out to Jesus, and beheld
the man calm and composed. And as St. Mark says in the
words just cited, they who saw it, then related to them par
ticularly how the thing had been done. And as the case of
one of these men was well known, he having been often
bound ineffectually, and a long time afflicted with this dis
order, and having been often terrible to such as passed that
way : many, who afterwards saw him enjoying a composed
mind, and the right exercise of reason, must have been fully
apprised of his miraculous cure, if they were attentive.

As our Lord performed this miracle with deliberation, so
I think he stayed in the same place some time afterwards :
by which means many had an opportunity of seeing him with
the man at his feet. We do not know exactly how long
our Saviour was here : but we may form a conjecture. It
was even, when he took shipping : in the passage there was
a storm. It is very likely, he did not arrive at the other
side until morning : and probably he stayed there the great
est part of that day before he embarked again.

Of the Demoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 463

6. We learn by this history to trust in Divine Providence,
and not to live in fear of evil spirits, and their influence, or
any accident whatever. They are under strict confinement ;
or, if they are permitted at all to visit our region and orb,
they are under constraint and control. They shall not be
allowed to inflict on us any evil, nor shall any accident
whatever befall us, but what shall be overruled and sancti
fied for our benefit, if we choose the thing- that is good, and
cast our care upon God.

7. We learn the reasonableness of gratitude for benefits
bestowed upon us, especially if we receive any signal de
liverance from great and uncommon afflictions. Our blessed
Lord did not choose that this person should attend him :
however, he " bid him go home, and tell his friends there,
how great things God had done for him, and had compassion
on him." Though our Lord was meek and humble, and was
far from seeking honour from men ; he could not but be
pleased with a thankful mind, sensible of benefits. Once,
as he was travelling, and preaching the doctrine of the
kingdom of heaven, " he met ten lepers, and they lifted up
their voices, and said : Jesus, master, have mercy upon us,"
Luke xvii. 13. He had mercy upon them, and bade them
go and show themselves to the priest. " As they went they
were cleansed. And one of them, when he saw that he was
healed, turned back, and with a loud voice glorified God,
and fell down on his face at his feet, giving him thanks;
and he was a Samaritan. And Jesus answering said, Were
there not ten cleansed ? But where are the nine ? There are
not found that returned to give glory to God, save this
stranger. And he said unto him, Arise, go thy way, thy
faith hath made thee whole."

8. Finally, from this history we may learn to bear meekly
rebukes and discouragements in the prosecution of good
designs. Jesus came into this country with a good inten
tion ; he here wrought a miracle, a work of the greatest
kindness, restoring a man, who had been long under the
sorest of afflictions, whose cure was beyond all human skill,
to the full use of reason and understanding. Nor was the
neighbourhood altogether unconcerned in this benefit : the
man, who before was disagreeable and terrible, was com
posed, and might be useful among them. But because this
happy event was attended with temporal loss to some of them,
they entreat the compassionate author of that great benefit,
in whom was so much wisdom, and so much goodness, and
so much power, " to depart out of their coasts." And he
acquiesced, not choosing to obtrude himself upon them, as

464 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

the evangelists inform us ; " And he went up into the ship,
and returned back again." However it is added ; " And
it came to pass, that when Jesus was returned, the people
gladly received him, for they were all waiting for him."
These things are written for the direction and support of
wise and good men.

DISCOURSE II.

MARK v. 19.

Howbeit Jesus suffered him not, but saith unto him, Go
home to thy friends, and tell them, how great things the
Lord hath done for thee, and hath had compassion on
thee.

HAVING formerly explained and improved the history
of most of our Lord's miracles, and lately that of the cure
of the two men at the tombs, in the country of the Gadarenes;
I have thought it not improper, to consider in general the
case of those, who in the New Testament are spoken of as
having evil or unclean spirits.

The subject is not immediately practical ; and it is most
agreeable to insist upon the general principles of true reli
gion, which are universally acknowledged, or are contro
verted by a few only ; together with the virtues of a good
life, which are of the greatest importance, and of absolute
necessity, without which no man shall see the Lord ; and
those helps and means, which, in their own nature, or by
divine appointment, are fitted to promote faith in God, good
works, and an heavenly frame of mind. These are the most
excellent, the most delightful subjects of meditation and
discourse. Upon no considerations, by no means whatever,
would one be called off from these points, or cease to make
them the usual topics of discourse in Christian assemblies.

Nevertheless, it may not be altogether unprofitable, to
treat on the subject I am now entering upon ; it being what
frequently occurs in the history of our Saviour's miracles,
as recorded in the gospels. It is likely, therefore, that by
considering the several texts, wherein these unhappy cases
and their cure are mentioned, some light may be cast upon

Of the Demoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 465

the holy scriptures, and some parts of the evangelical history
may be better read with understanding.

In treating* this subject I propose to observe the following
method.

I. I would show what are the opinions of men of the pre
sent, and late times, concerning this matter.

II. I would observe, what was the general opinion in the
time of our Saviour, and his apostles, and what notions men
then formed of these cases.

III. I will endeavour to discover the truth, and what idea
we ought to have of those unhappy persons, who are spoken
of as possessed of devils.

IV. I intend to consider objections and difficulties, relat
ing to that opinion, which may appear to be most probi ble.

I. In the first place I would show, what are the opinions
of men of the present, or late times, concerning this matter.
For there are two different opinions : one general and com
mon, the other less general, and somewhat uncommon.

The opinion which I take to be most common, is this ;
that these persons were possessed, and inhabited, acted,
governed, and influenced by some spirit, or spirits; there
having been in some of these persons one, in others many of
these evil spirits.

And 1 reckon, that most in our times suppose these evil
spirits to have been bad, or fallen angels, some of the com
panions, instruments, and agents of him, who is the chief of
fallen angels, and called Satan, or Beelzebub, or the Devil,
by way of eminence.

This I take to be the opinion of the vulgar: it obtains
also very much among the learned. We have these words
of a great and eminent writer, in a late defence and vindi
cation of our blessed Saviour's miracles against modern
cavils and objections. He is speaking of the two men at
the tombs, and the drowning of the herd of swine. ' So a
that even this permission of Jesus to the evil spirits was
amply compensated, by casting a whole legion of devils
out of one person, that is, by suffering about three of them
to enter into each hog, instead of about six thousand of
them keeping possession of one man. And this disposses
sion of those evil spirits, and permission given them in
consequence of it, were arguments of great force, to show
the power of Jesus over so numerous a regiment.' So
that great author.

The number of the spirits that had taken possession of the
unhappy man, is here inferred and concluded from his call-
a See Bp. Smallbrook's Vindication of our Saviour's Miracles, Vol. I. p. 203.
VOL. I. 2 H

466 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

ing himself Legion. A Roman legion at that time usually
consisted of six thousand soldiers or more. That learned
writer therefore supposeth, that there were about so many
evil spirits in that man. And when those spirits were cast
out of the man, there being about two thousand swine that
were drowned in the sea, the same writer supposeth, that
each swine became possessed, and was hurried down the
precipice by three devils.

Every one, perhaps, does not judge it needful to conclude,
that there were exactly such a number of spirits in the man,
because he called himself Legion: but it is generally sup
posed, that there were in him very many evil b spirits.

It being thought, that these persons were possessed and
tormented by one or more evil spirits, whereas such cases
are now very uncommon among us, if there are any at
all : it has been supposed, that c it might be wisely allowed
of and suffered by the Divine Being at that time. Satan
and his instruments were then loosed, and permitted to
possess and torment many persons in the land of Judea,
•and the adjoining countries. Hereby the power of Jesus,
the Messiah, was rendered the more conspicuous, by deliver
ing men from those possessions, and all the infirmities conse
quent upon them. Since which time, and especially since
the power of miracles has ceased in the church, Satan has
not been permitted to torment men in this world in that
extraordinary and remarkable manner.

This I take to be the prevailing sentiment of learned and
unlearned, and the scheme that has been formed concerning
this point.

The other opinion, less common, is, that these cases were
distempers only, which the human frame is subject to in this
state of mortality, through its weakness and imperfection,
and the accidents it is exposed to, and the temper of parti
cular constitutions, and the influences of diet, and the cir
cumambient air, and other natural causes.

b Jesus asked him saying, What is thy name ? Which question was not
asked to gratify his own, or others' curiosity ; but for this good end, that the
Gadarenes might see what a miserable condition their countryman was in, and
be more sensible of the mercy of his cure, and their own great danger amidst
such vast numbers of evil spirits as then swarmed amongst them : since so
many had taken possession of that one unhappy man, as to deserve the name
of Legion, (above six thousand,) as one of them told our Lord in the name
of the rest, in answer to his question : My name is Legion, for we are many.
Fr. Bragge on our Saviour's Miracles. Vol. I. p. 75.

c He cast out evil spirits, who by the Divine Providence were permitted to
exert themselves at that time, and to possess many persons. Dr. Jortin's Re
marks upon Ecclesiastical History, Vol. II. p. 17. See the same, Vol. I. p. 14.

Of the Demoniacs mentioned in the jVew; Testament. 467

These are the two principal sentiments of moderns upon
this head.

II. In the second place I am to show, what was the gene
ral opinion in the time of our Saviour and his apostles, and
what notions men then formed of those cases, which are so
frequently mentioned in the gospels.

I shall endeavour to show the ancient sentiment in several
propositions and observations.

1. In the first place it is fit to observe the style, or the
several phrases and expressions made use of in the New
Testament in speaking of this matter. For there can be no
doubt, but the evangelists have used the expressions which
obtained at that time.

One expression, which frequently occurs, is, " possessed
with devils." So in St. Matthew, chap. iv. 24, " And his
fame went throughout all Syria. And they brought unto
him all sick people, that were taken with divers diseases and
torments, and those which were possessed with devils."
Again, ch. viii. 16, " When the even was come, they
broughl unto him many that were possessed with devils.
And he cast out the spirits with his word, and healed all
that were sick." The same evangelist, speaking* of the men
in the country of the Gadarenes, says, ver. 28, " There met
him two possessed with devils."

Another phrase very frequent in speaking of this matter
is that of persons having " unclean spirits." When our Lord
sent forth the disciples, " he gave them power against un
clean spirits, and to cast them out, and to heal all manner of
sickness," Matt. x. 1. And St. Mark, v. 13, in the account
of the man called Legion, says : " And forthwith Jesus gave
them leave, and the unclean spirits went out, and entered
into the swine." It is in the Acts likewise, v. 16, " There
came also a multitude out of the cities round about unto
Jerusalem, bringing sick folks, and them which were vexed
with unclean spirits." And at Samaria, Acts viii. 7, when
Philip, the deacon and evangelist, was there, " unclean spi
rits, crying with a loud voice, came out of many."

Sometimes the phrase is unclean spirit in the singular
number; Mark i. 23, " And there was in the synagogue a
man with an unclean spirit." And St. Mark useth also this
same expression, ver. 2 of this chapter, speaking of the man
called Legion ; " When he was come out of the ship, there
met him a man with an unclean spirit." And at ver. 8, our
Lord says, " Come out of the man, thou unclean spirit."

There is another form of expression somewhat different
2 H 2

468 Suppkment to the First Part of the Credibility^

from this in Luke iv. 33. " And in the synagogue there
was a man whicli had a spirit of an unclean devil."

Sometimes they are called 'evil' or wicked spirits ; Luke
vii. 21, " In that same hour he cured many of their infir
mities, and plagues, and of evil spirits." See also viii. 2,
and elsewhere.

2. Give me leave to observe in the second place, that in
speaking of this matter, particularly of persons possessed
with devils, our translation is not exact ; and instead of
devils, the word daemons would be much more proper :
for that is the word which we have in the Greek original,
and in the ancient Latin version, and in many modern
translations.

If any will be pleased to observe carefully, I believe they
will find, that throughout the New Testament there is but
one evil spirit called devil : who is supposed to be the
chief or prince of the fallen angels, and is often called Satan
and Beelzebub. Nor is that word once used in the plural
number, in the New Testament, where Satan, or the fallen
angels, are spoken of.

That the scripture supposes but one evil being, or spirit,
called the devil, may be easily perceived by every one from
some plain texts. Matt. xxv. 41, " Then shall he say unto
them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into
everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels."
Rev. xii. 9, " The great dragon was cast out, that old ser
pent, called the devil and Satan," Again, Acts xiii. 10, St.
Paul says to Ely mas, the sorcerer : " Thou child of the
devil," or of Satan, that wicked one, prince of evil spirits.
James iv. 7, "Resist the devil, and he will flee from you."
1 Pet. v. 8, " Be sober, be vigilant, because your adversary,
the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom
he may devour." Here the original word is rightly ren
dered. And every one may perceive, that hereby is meant,
that one great tempter and seducer of mankind called Satan,
and the prince of evil spirits. This is that evil being, by
whom our Lord is said to have been tempted in the wilder
ness ; Matt. ir. 1, " Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit to
be tempted of the devil." Mark i. 13, " And he was there
in the wilderness forty days tempted of Satan."

There is therefore but one evil spirit, meant by that word
in scripture ; and wherever we have it in our translation in
the plural number, the original word is daemons. For in
stance, 1 Cor. x. 20, " Now I say, that the things, which
the gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, not to God."

Of the Dcemoniacs mentioned in tlie New Testament. 469

The original word is daemons [Aat/ioi/tot?]. And so through
out that context the word daemons should be put in the
translation, in the room of that which we have. " Ye can
not drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of daemons.
Ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and the table of
daemons." This is the exact and literal version of that place.

For settling this matter, and for giving full satisfaction to
such as are not able to consult the original language of the
New Testament, I would take notice of a few more places.
Matt. x. 8, Our Lord said to the disciples, when he sent
them forth from him : " Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers,
cast out devils." In the Greek it is, " Cast out daemons."
Matt. xii. 27, " If I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom
do your children cast them out V It should be rendered
daemons. As also ver.28, " But if I cast out devils," rather
daemons, " by the finger of God, then is the kingdom of God
come unto you." And what is said of Mary Magdalen, Luke
viii. should be thus rendered: " Out of whom went seven
daemons." And James ii. 19, " Thou believest that there is
one God. The devils also believe and tremble." In the
original it is daemons.

It is somewhat difficult to determine, what ought to be
understood by the word daemon, as used in the New Testa^
ment.

It is likely, that many now by daemons understand fallen
angels. But at present our inquiry is, what was the mean
ing of the evangelical writers ; in what sense this word was
used by them, and was used and understood by their con
temporaries, or those who lived in the times of Christ and
his apostles. And though it may be difficult to determine
this point with full and absolute certainty; yet there are
some reasons, which may dispose us to think, that thereby
they meant the souls of bad men.

The word daemon, used in the gospels, and in other
parts of the New Testament, is very frequent in Greek au
thors. And in those profane authors, as we call them, the
word has various senses. It sometimes denotes6 God him-

Emi £e r/ rs Saifiovia Trpovota, vtf rjg ati <rw£o//e0a, K. X. Ap. Dionys.

iq. Roman. 1. x.
Intellectual System, B. i. ch. 4. p. 26—263. edit. 1678.

Hal, Antiq. Roman. 1. x. cap. 10. p. 607. ed. Hudson. And see Cudworth's

I shall transcribe here an article of an ancient lexicographer ; whereby it
appears, that, in ancient heathen writers, god and daemon are often used as
equivalent : and that Plato, once at least, called the supreme governor of the
world, the chief daemon. 0£0£, KO.I Scot, icai dai/j,ovtQ' OVTW yap 'Ofnjpy doieti,
fou/tovac Kct\uv Stsg. Kat TTXarwj/ de TOV TH iravrog KvflepvT]Tr)V, fif-yi^ov
Sainova wvofjiaaev. E^H drj TTJQ avrrjg j^pfiag TO Srnov, KO.I TO dainoviov. J.
Polluc. Onom. 1. i. sect. 1. Conf. Platon. Politic. T. 2. p. 272. E. Serran,

470 Supplement to tfie First Part of ike Credibility.

self, or the supreme deity ; sometimes an inferior deity,
and sometimes those genii, or lower orders of spirits, of
which some were reputed good, others bad.

In the New Testament the word is almost always used in
a bad sense, to denote an evil or impure spirit. Never
theless in one place we may allow it to be taken in a good
sense. Acts xvii. 18, when St. Paul was at Athens, some
said of him, " He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange
gods ;" in the original, * strange daemons ;' gevwv Sia/novtwv.
Those persons imagined, that St. Paul designed to recom
mend to them, and introduce among them, the worship
of some foreign daemons, or gods of another city and coun
try, not received in their city. As they were heathens,
they may be supposed to have used the word in a good
sense. But generally, for certain, in the New Testament,
and ever since, among all Christian writers, the word has
been used to denote an evil spirit.

And there are remaining some passages of ancient au
thors, which may be of no small service for assuring us,
what was meant by this word among Jewish people, and by
the writers of the New Testament. One is a passage of Jo-
sephus, the celebrated Jewish historian, who was contem
porary with Christ's apostles. He says, * that e daemons are
' the spirits of wicked men, who enter into living men, and
' destroy them, unless they are so happy as to meet with

* speedy relief.' Another is a passage of Justin Martyr, a
Christian writer, born of Greek parents, in the country of
Samaria, who flourished about the middle of the second
century. He is arguing for a future state, and among other
things he there speaks *off those who are seized and tor-
' mented by the souls of the dead, whom all call demoniacs

* and madmen.' And there are many other * authors, to
whom I might refer as countenancing this opinion.

And what is sometimes called the daemon, is at other times called the god
of Socrates. Mai'Oavw, w Sw/cpartjf, on Stj av TO dai^ioviov <f>i]g oavT(p (Ka^ore
•yiyvevOai. Platon. Euthyph. T. i. p. 3. /3. Vid. et Apol. Socr. p. 40. et alibi.
Maximus Tyrius has two chapters, entitled in this manner : Ti TO &WJKOVIOV
2w»cpar8£. Ert Tre/oi TH 2wicpar8£ Baipoviti. The chapter of Apuleius upon
the same subject is entitled, De Deo Socratis.

e Ta yap KaXs^ttva daifiovia, TO.VTO. de Trovqpiov e<rn> avOpwTTwv Trvff/iara
TOIQ Ztomv eiadvoptva, Kai KTSIVOVTO. TUQ fiorjOtiag firj rvyxavovra£. De Bell.
Jud. 1. vii. c. 25. al. cap. 6. sect. 3.

f Kai oc ^jv^aig cnroQavovTiov \a[i(3avop,£voi KUI piTrrsfitvoi ai>0pw7roi, OVQ
SaifjiovoXrjTTTSQ KUI fiaivofjievsQ KaXavi Travrtf. Justin. Ap. 1. i. [al. 2.] p. 65.
Par. 1620. p. 54. ed. Bened.

g eivai T£ TravTCt TOV atpa ^u%wi> f/WTrXewv' Kai TSTSQ ^ai^ovaq TS Kai

t' Kai VTTO r«rwv Tri^nrtoBat avQpatTTOiG TUG Tt ov«pe£» Kai ra

Of the Demoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 471

This sense of the word may also be argued from divers
texts of the New Testament, some of which have been
already quoted. 1 Cor. x. 20, " The things which the
gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to daemons, not to God."
Now the heathen deities, or daemons, to whom they offered
sacrifices, were not angels good or bad ; of whom it does
not appear that the ancient Greeks and Romans had any
notion ; but departed heroes, or the souls of men whom
they respected, but whom the Jews, the worshippers and
servants of the one God, always considered as evil beings.

Moreover, heathen deities are often spoken of in the Old
Testament, as dead men, or daemons. Among directions
given to the Israelites, it is said, Levit. xvii. 7, " And they
shall no more offer their sacrifices to devils," or daemons ;
which is the word in the ancient Greek translation, made
from the Hebrew before the time of our Saviour. And
Psal. xcvi. 5, " For all the gods of the nations are idols,"
The same ancient Greek version, called that of the Seventy
Jewish elders, render it, " All the gods of the nations are
daemons," meaning dead men, or the souls of such. Psal,
cvi. 37. Among the offences of the people of Israel this is
reckoned up, when they forsook God, and turned idolaters,
in imitation of the heathens, " They sacrificed their sons and
their daughters unto devils." It should rather be rendered
daiinons. And that thereby is meant dead men, or their
departed spirits, is manifest from the same Psalm, ver. 28 :
" They joined themselves to Baal-Peor, and ate the sacri
fices of the dead." And herein is shown the absurdity of
the Jewish people, when, instead of inquiring of God, they
applied to heathen idols, who were dead men, and incapable
of giving any counsel. Isa viii. 19, " Should not a people

otipsia voffs TI KCU vyuiag, K. \. Pythagoras, Ap. Diog. Laert. in Vita Pytha-
gorae, n. 32. p. 514.

Plerique tamen, ex Platonis magisterio, dgeraones putant animas corporeo
raunere liberatas ; laudabilium quoque virorum aethereos daemones, improbo-
rum vero nocentes. Chalcid. in Platon. Tim. cap. 135. p. 330.

In Chrysostom's time, some demoniacs would say, that they were possessed
by the soul of such or such a monk ; which must have been owing to a com
mon opinion, that daemons were the souls of dead men. Ti xv, on ol Saifjiovtg
XryacFi, ra (j,ova%8 rs Stwot; rj $>v%i<] ei/u, <j>rjai. Chrys. de Lazaro, Cone. 2,
Tom. i. p. 728.

Avroi, 0»j0iv, oi #ai/iova>vr£f fioa<rtv, on '^v^ri r8 StwoQ f yw» In Matt. horn.
28. [al. 29.] Tom. 7. p. 336. C.

He mentions it as the common opinion of meaner people in his time, that
the souls of all who died a violent death became daemons. Kat yap TTO\\OI

i rag

yiv£<70ai. De Laz. Serm. 2. Tom. i. p. 727. E. Vid. et Tertullian. De Anima.
cap. 57. p. 355.

472 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

seek unto their God! For the living to the dead!" How
strange is that conduct ! what infatuation ! Deut. xxxii.
15, " But Jeshurun waxed fat, and provoked the Lord to
anger. They sacrificed to daemons, not to God."

The word daemon, therefore, being used not only by
heathens themselves, for their deities, but also, and that not
seldom, in the sacred scriptures : and heathen deities being
generally supposed to be dead men, or departed spirits ;
there is some reason to think this is what is meant, when
any are spoken of as under their influence.

However, notwithstanding the speciousness of this argu
ment, I choose to leave the point undecided, and to submit it
to every one's judgment, to think as he pleaseth.

4. I would observe, that among the Jews it was a general
opinion, that neither the punishment of fallen angels, nor of
bad men, was to be completed, till the great day of the ge
neral judgment.

Concerning the fallen angels, I before referred h to places
in the second epistle of St. Peter, and the epistle of St.
Jude : where they are spoken of, as "reserved unto judg
ment," or " unto the judgment of the great day." It is the
same with regard to men. Therefore St. Peter says, 2 ep.
iii. 7, " The heavens and the earth, which are now, by the
same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the
day of judgment, and perdition of ungodly men."

Their punishment therefore not being yet full and com
plete, it was the opinion of many, that for serving the wise
ends of Providence, some of these beings, both fallen angels
and the departed souls of men, were permitted to come
abroad, out of Hades, the receptacle of spirits.

It was certainly the common opinion, (whether there was
any ground for it or not,) that i the region of our air was filled
with invisible beings. Chrysostom reckons it among the
favours of Providence, thatk when the air is full of daemons
and adverse powers, we do not discern them ; for the sight
of them might frighten us out of our wits, if not to death.
Cassian 1 speaks to the like purpose. The great Eusebius

h P. 455. * OVTOI TOIVVV 01 ayyfXoi ot fKTreaovTtQ r<ov

TTfpi TOV aepa ffcOi'TtQ Kai TTJV yrjv, start £if ra vrrepspavta vTrepicvipai
KO.I ai TMV yijavTwv ^v^ai, 01 irept TOV KoafJiov ftui TtXavwfitvoi
Alhenag. Apol. p. 28. B.

k IJoffoi SainovtQ UQ TOV atpa fapovTai TSTOV ; noffai tvavTtai Svva.fj.tiG ; ft
fiovov CTTfTpe^fv avroiQ Tfjv oi//4v Trjv tavTOiv £ei%cu Tt]v <j)o(3tpav tKttvrjv KOI
ctTtpTTi], UK av t^e^rjp.11' 5 «K av a7ro\a>(i£0a j UK av dif(p9aprjfjiev» Chr. in. Ps.
xli. Tom. v. p. 137.

1 Tanta vero spirituum densitate constipatus est aer iste, qui inter coelum
terramque diffunditur, in quo non quieti, non otiosi pervolitant : ut satis uti-

Of the Demoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 473

of Caesarea supposed these spirits, or at least many of them,
to be fallen angels. * He says, that m when they had sinned,

* and for their transgression were expelled the heavenly

* abodes, a large part of them were thrust into hell, called

* the abyss, and confined there ; others of them were suf-

* fered to dwell near the moon, and in the region of the air,

* below the moon, and near our earth.'

This also was a common opinion of the heathen people
concerning their inferior deities, that they were in the air
near the earth. And n they were supposed by many to sub
sist in part by fumes of incense, and the steams of slain
beasts offered to them in sacrifice.

To these, whether fallen angels, or spirits of another kind,
St. Paul0 is thought to refer, when he says, Eph. vi. 11,
12, " Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able
to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we wrestle not
against flesh and blood :" we contend not with men only,
" but against principalities, against powers, against the ru
lers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wicked
ness in high places:" that is, against wicked spirits, that are
in the upper regions above, or in the air, as he plainly ex-
presseth it, ch. ii. 2, " Wherein, in time past, ye walked, ac
cording to the course of this world, according to the prince
of the power of the air."

5. All these evil spirits, in general, (whether fallen angels,
or others,) were supposed to be in subjection to Satan, or
the Devil, who is their head and prince : at least this was

liter humanis aspectibus eos providentia divina absconderit, et subtraxerit, &c.
Cassian. Coll. 8. cap. xii. Ap. Bib. PP. Tom. 7. Vid. et Euseb. Dem. Ev. 1.
x. p. 502. C. D.

m TOV tipappoZovra TOIQ Svfffftfieai %wpov, Kpifffi SiKaiq,, KOI cnroQafffi TS

/icyaXa 0£8 raprapov oiKtiv, 6v afivaaov oi Stioi Xoyot 7rpoo>ayop£U8<n, KO.I OKOTOQ
—— — wv fipa^v ri Kai fiiKpov aTrotTTracr/xa, yvfjivavis \apiv TCJV fvcrefliaQ a^A^rwv,
afi<f)t yt]vt Kai VTTO atXrjvTjv atpa KaraKufyQtv. Euseb. Pr. Ev. 1. vii. c. 16.
p. 329. n 'Oi de y&v irtpiyiioi TIVIQ OVTIQ Kai Kara^Qovioi —

rafyoig vfKpiov Kai fj.vTj^.acn — aijuaot re Kai Xv0pni£, /ecu iravroiwv ZMCJV crw/xa(Tt,
rg re £K nov avaOvfiidJfitVMv, feat airo TTJQ yrjc, i^ar 111^,0 ^tvdiv avadvaei
rtQ. Praep. Ev. 1. v. p. 181. B.

Toisrog yap o TO>V Saifjiovuv rpo?roc, ar' av jutv ry KViavy, Kai ry
Kai rote; aipaGtv OVTBQ Stpairivxai, KaQa-rrtp Kvvtq aifio(3opoi Kai Xt%voi Trapayt-
vovrai Xa-^ovTfQ' or' av 8t fjirjSti^ 6 ravra rraps^v y, KaQairtp TIVI Xt/io) 8ia<j)-
Otipovrai. Chr. de S. Babyla. Contr. Julian, et Gentiles. Tom. 2. p. 558.

Nisi forte hostiarum deus animas devorat, aut ex aris ardentibus nidorem
consectatur et fumos, &c. Arnob. 1. vii. in. p. 212,

'Opw dt vfjiag /iorXfra ^aipovrac; rip KUTTV^I, KUI TTJV tvu^iav TCLVTI\V r^i^r\v
oio^itvsq, oirorav tig TOV spavov r) Kvicraa yivrjTai i\i0ffOfj,evr] Trepi Kairvi^.
Lucian. Prometh. T. i. p. 183. ed. Grsev.

Vid. etidem de Sacrificiis. ib. p. 366. et Porphyr. de Abst. 1. ii. cap. 42. p.
86. ed. Cantabr. et Aristoph. Aves. ver. 183. et seqq. et ver. 1515. et seqq.
ed. Kust. o Vid. Euseb. Pr. Ev. 1. vii. p. 329. D.

474 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

the opinion of the Jewish people, as will be shown presently.
However, it was fit to be mentioned here ; and it appears
from the texts of St. Paul just cited. He desires, that the
Ephesians might be " able to stand against the wiles of the
devil :" and then adds, " For we wrestle against princi
palities, and powers, and spiritual wickedness in high
places." They therefore were under him. And in the
other place he speaks expressly of" the prince of the power
of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of
disobedience :" undoubtedly meaning Satan, even him, who
is the evil one by way of distinction, and the great tempter
and seducer of mankind.

6. These evil spirits, or daemons, (whether fallen angels
or souls of bad men,) were supposed to be, under Satan their
head, the instruments of many afflictions and inconveniences
to men in this mortal frame.

This is evident from many places in the gospels, where
those unhappy persons are mentioned, who are said to have
"an unclean spirit," or to be "possessed of devils," as we
sometimes render the word, but who would be more properly
said to be * daemon iacs,' that is, affected by one or more
daemons. I shall remind you of several instances.

Madness, or distraction, is one evil often ascribed to them.
This was the case of the two men at the tombs, who were
exceeding fierce, and one of them at least had been thus af
flicted for a long season, and when confined and chained,
had broken his bands. This was one of the opprobrious
reflections cast upon our Saviour. John x. 20, 21, " Many P
of them said, He has a daemon, and is mad. Why hear ye
him ? Others said, These are not the words of a daemoniac.
Can a daemon open the eyes of the blind ? "

There are several other indispositions which are ascribed
to them, Matt. ix. 32, 33, " And as they went out, they
brought unto him a dumb man possessed with a devil :"
literally, ' a dumb man, a daemoniac;' av6pw7rov KW^OV Sai-
/uLovigopevov. "And when the daemon was gone out, the
dumb man spake, and the multitude marvelled."

In the xiith chapter of the same gospel, ver. 22, and there
fore certainly another case : " Then Avas brought unto him
one possessed with a devil, or a daemoniac," £a</iow£o/ue*>o?,
" blind and dumb. And he healed him : insomuch that the
blind and dumb both spake and saw." In St. Luke xi. 14,
the same miracle is thus related : " And he was casting out
a daemon. And it came to pass, when the daemon was gone
out, the dumb spake, and the people wondered."

p EXtyov Se TroXXot {£ avrwv' Aaifjioviov 6%«, KM ^aivtrai, K. X.

Of the D&moniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 475

Mark ix. 25, " When Jesus saw that the people came
running together, he rebuked the unclean spirit, saying unto
him, Thou dumb and deaf spirit, I charge thee, come out of
him, and enter no more into him." That is the young man
who was brought to the disciples when our Lord was on the
mount, and they could not cure him : he was plainly epilep-
tical ; and besides, either constantly, or at least under the
paroxysms of his distemper, was deaf and dumb.

Mark i. 23, 26, " And there was in their synagogue a man
with an unclean spirit. And he cried out, saying, Let us
alone, what have we to do with thee thou Jesus of Nazareth ?
And Jesus rebuked him, saying, Hold thy peace, and come
out of him. And when the unclean spirit had torn him, and
cried with a loud voice, he came out of him/' This person,
as I suppose every one may allow, had the epilepsy, or
falling sickness, and it is ascribed to an unclean spirit. The
same history is in Luke iv. 33 — 35.

Once more, Luke xiii. 11 — 16, " And behold, there was
a woman, which had a spirit of infirmity eighteen years,
and was bowed down, and could in no wise lift up herself.
And when Jesus saw her, he called her to him, and said
unto her, Woman, thou art loosed from thy infirmity." The
ruler of the synagogue pretending- to take offence, because
it was the sabbath-day, our Lord, beside other things, said :
" Ought not this woman, being a daughter of Abraham,
whom Satan has bound, lo, these eighteen years, to be loosed
from this bond on the sabbath-day ?"

Here Satan himself is considered as the cause of this in
firmity ; though very frequently these cases are spoken of
as effects of the malicious influences of daemons. The rea
son is, that Satan is their prince and ruler, and what is done

by instruments, or subjects, with the approbation of a ruler,
or principal agent, is fitly ascribed to him.

• And, not to mention any more particular instances, it
seems, that the Jewish people supposed Satan and his instru
ments, that is, daemons, evil spirits, to be capable of inflict
ing almost all sorts of diseases. St. Peter therefore, at the
house of Cornelius, as his discourse is summarily rehearsed,
Acts x. 38, says : " You know, how God anointed Jesus of
Nazareth with the Holy Ghost, and with power : who went
about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of
the devil. For God was with him."

7. I must proceed to observe farther, for showing the
sentiment of the Jewish people in our Saviour's time, that
they supposed the distempers or torments inflicted by evil
spirits might be removed or cured.

476 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

So Joseplius said in a passage cited above, that these evils
were mortal, unless speedy relief was obtained.

Doubtless the Jews believed, that these inconveniences
might be removed by the divine disposal, and by a prophet,
speaking in the name of God, who had power of working
miracles. Therefore many, who believed Jesus to be a pro
phet, and the Messiah, brought such cases to him for cure.

They likewise supposed, that daemons might be exorcised
or adjured out of the bodies of men, of which they had taken
possession. St. Luke informs us, that at Ephesus, " certain
of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to call over
them that had evil spirits in the name of the Lord Jesus,
saying: We adjure you by Jesus, whom Paul preacheth,"
Acts xix. 13.

It is likely, that from the miracles which they had seen
wrought by Paul, those exorcists hoped for better success
by making use of the name of Jesus, than by their common
forms and methods of exorcism.

That exorcisms were used by the Jews, we are expressly
assured 4 by Josephus. He speaks as if Solomon had left
some prescriptions for these cases, and directed to the use
of herbs and roots, that would be of great advantage.

I have now shown, what were the Jewish sentiments upon
this head in the time of our Saviour and his apostles, and
•when the books of the New Testament were written.

8. It is fit I should add, that there were dsemoniacs like
wise among the heathens about the same time ; that is, there
were many among them who had indispositions, which were
reputed to be owing to the influence of daemons.

Some learned men have denied, or overlooked this : they
have gone upon a supposition, that such cases were to be
found among the Jews only, and in their own country ; but
that is manifestly a mistake, as may be shown from the New
Testament itself. Matt. xv. 21, 22, " Then Jesus went thence,
and departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon. And behold,
a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried
unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou son of
David. My daughter is grievously vexed with a daemon :"
St. Mark has the same history, ch. vii. 24 — 26, " And
thence he arose, and went into the borders of Tyre and Sidon.
And a certain woman, whose daughter had an unclean spirit,
heard of him, and came, and fell at his feet : [the woman
was a Greek, a Syrophenician by nation :] and she besought
him, that he would cast forth the daemon out of her
daughter." And ver. 29, 30, " And he said unto her, The
i Antiq. Jud. 1. viii. cap. 2. section 5.

Of the Damoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 477

daemon is gone out of thy daughter. And when she was
come to her house, she found the daemon was gone out, and
her daughter laid upon the bed."

The affair at Ephesus, just taken notice of, is another
proof. The young maiden at Philippi, who had a " spirit
of divination," is a third instance, Acts xvi. 16, 18.

Many proofs of this might be alleged from heathen r
writers. But I forbear to take notice of them.

Undoubtedly there was a difference between the Jews and
them in some respects. The Jews thought all daemons in
general to be evil and unclean : but the heathens esteemed
many daemons to be good, for they were among their deities :
and therefore in some cases they might the more respect
some people for having a daemon, though the patient him*
self was unhappy. However, it is certain, that there were
among the heathens at this time many people, who had in
dispositions which are ascribed to daemons.

We have now made good progress in this argument. The
next thing to be inquired into is, what is the most reasonable
opinion concerning these cases. But that must be reserved
for another season.

In the mean time we may hence take occasion, as some
of old did who were witnesses of our Saviour's miracles,
" to praise God, who had g'iven such power unto men."
Matt. ix. 8, says the evangelist : «' When the even was come,
they brought unto him many deemoniacs: and he cast out
the spirits with his word, and healed all that were sick.
That it might be fulfilled which was sppken by Esaias the
prophet, saying: Himself took our infirmities, and bare
our sicknesses," Matt. viii. 16, 17.

The like gift did Jesus confer upon his disciples. " He
gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out,
and to heal all manner of sickness, and all manner of dis
ease," Matt. x. 1. Which power they displayed in the most
honourable manner after his ascension ; and it was a great
benefit to the men of that age to have their diseases so cured.
But the principal use, and the greatest benefit of these
wonderful works, both to the men of that time and to us, is,
that they ascertained and confirmed the excellent and im
portant doctrine of the gospel; which is so suited to improve
and exalt our minds, and cure evil affections, and deliver us
from the malignant influence of all the snares and temptations
of Satan, and this evil world. Which if we overcome, we

r See an Enquiry, and a Farther Enquiry, into the meaning of Daemoniacs in
the New Testament. See likewise Mr. W. Weston's Enquiry into the Rejec
tion of the Christian Miracles by the Heathens, p. 231, 233, and elsewhere,

478 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

shall in the end attain to a world, where there are no sick
nesses nor sorrows : where no evil men nor evil spirits shall
enter: where good men of all ages shall be united in one
happy and glorious society, and shall be for ever with the
Lord.

DISCOURSE III.

MARK v. 19.

Howbeit Jesus suffered him not, but saith unto him, Go
home to thy friends, and tell them how great things the
Lord hath done for thee, and hath had compassion on
thee.

WE now proceed to the third head of discourse, under
which we are to consider what is really the truth, or what
idea we ought to form of those unhappy persons, who in
the New Testament are spoken of as having " an unclean
spirit."

Here I certainly intend to speak my mind freely, and to
show plainly, what appears to me to be the truth. Never
theless, i am under little or no apprehension of giving of
fence ; partly, because I think I can rely upon the candour
of those who hear me ; partly, because I do not desire to
impose a particular sentiment upon any. All are at liberty
to judg'e for themselves, when they have heard and consi
dered what may be said on one side or another. For no one
opinion concerning these cases is like those articles of faith :
that Jesus is the Christ, that he lived and died in Judea, and
rose again, and ascended into heaven, and will come again
to judge men according to their works : or, that he and his
apostles wrought many wonderful works of an extraordinary
nature.

Whether the indispositions that these persons laboured
under were owing to the influence of evil spirits or not, the
cure of them was miraculous. Nor is the miracle at all
lessened, by supposing them to be only grievous and long
continued bodily distempers. Thea rectifying the human

a ' Now which is an instance of the greatest power, to command an inferior

* to depart one's presence, which if he refuses to do, one can turn him out,

* whether he will or not ? or to correct the juices and solids of a disordered

Of the Damoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 479

frame, all on a sudden, which had been before greatly dis
ordered, is at least as great a work, as commanding an evil
spirit to leave the body, or any other particular place.

Were I to attempt to represent the displays of the divine
perfections in the works of nature, and the more conspicuous
parts of the visible creation, and to observe the greatness,
the number, the wonderful disposition, and regular order and
motions of the heavenly bodies, should I do this upon the
ground of the now prevailing scheme of modern philosophy,
it is likely, it would give no offence to any ; though the
present scheme is very different from the sentiment of the
ancients ; and though there are divers texts of scripture
which suppose, or countenance, the opinion that prevailed in
ancient times.

" The sun," says the Psalmist, " is as a bridegroom coming
out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a
race. His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and
his circuit unto the ends of it," Psal. xix. 5, 6. Again ;
" He appointeth the moon for seasons ; the sun knoweth his
going down," Psal. civ. 19. And in ver. 5 of the same
Psalm, it is spoken of as one of the wonderful works of God,
" that he has laid the foundations of the earth so that it
should not be removed for ever."

Yet it is now generally supposed, that the sun is the fixed
centre of our grand system, and that the earth, beside its
diurnal rotation upon its own axis, makes an annual revolu
tion about the sun.

The ancient Christians, and others, almost universally sup
posed, that our earth is flat, with here and there rising hills
and mountains : and could by no means allow, that there
were any inhabitants in that part of the earth which was op
posite to themselves. We think the earth to be globose, and
find no difficulty to believe, that it is inhabited all round,
on every side.

Nor do we judge those to have been enemies to mankind,
or to the sacred scriptures, who have taken pains to confute

' body, and regulate its motions by a word ? There seems to be no comparison
' in the instances of power. And therefore I think it more to the credit of
' the miracle, and more to our Saviour's glory, to have cured the unhappy
' people in the manner by me contended for, than in the other.' Further
Enquiry into the meaning of Daemoniacs in the N. T. p. 107.

Us penchent a croire, que leurs maladies etoient naturelles, mais que les
causes en etoient inconnues. Cette opinion ne me scandaliseroit point. La
raison en est, que les miracles de N. S. qui les guerissoit n'en sont que plus
grands. Car que des etres intelligens obeissent au commandement de J. C.
cela n' est pas si miraculeuse que de commander a des maladies et de les faire
cesser par un simple ordre. Beausobre, Remarques sur le N. T. p. 14.

480 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

and overthrow the once established opinions ; and to show,
that the scriptures, without deciding any thing in those
points, only use the common way of speaking.

If the like should be attempted by any, with regard to
some ancient opinions concerning the supposed agency of
evil spirits, I presume there would be no reason to
be offended, provided their sentiment be modestly pro
posed, and with a view to promote knowledge among Chris
tian s.

The opinions of modern interpreters, and other Christians,
concerning the case of those who are spoken of as having
unclean spirits, you may remember were these two; one
more generally received, which allows that they were real
possessions : the other less common, that they were mere
bodily diseases and indispositions ; though it was then the
prevailing opinion, that those disorders were caused by evil
spirits. And those persons, and their friends, attributing
these disorders to Satan, and demons under him, our Sa
viour often adapts his expressions to that opinion, without
countenancing or approving it.

That this last mentioned is the more just and probable
account of these cases, may appear from several considera
tions, which I shall now propound to you.

1. It having been in those times a very common opinion,
that there were many evil spirits in the region of the air, it
is not at all strange, that many people should live under ap
prehensions of suffering from them.

And many might be induced to ascribe to such spirits,
and to their power and influence, several indispositions, and
other calamities that befell them. Moreover, some persons
of a speculative and philosophical temper might think it
best to cherish this opinion among the people, with a view
to subserve divers ends and purposes which they deemed
innocent and useful : one of which might be promoting the
belief of the existence of spirits or invisible beings. Some
there were, as the sadducees among' the Jews, who denied
the existence of angels, and the souls of men after death.
The pharisees therefore, and some others, might lay hold of
and encourage the notion, that many bodily disorders were
owing to evil spirits, the better to secure the persuasion of
their real existence. For effects cannot be without causes.
If such affecting disorders proceeded from spirits, they have
a being, though they are riot visible.

This therefore may in some measure help us to account
for the prevalence of this opinion, though it had no good
foundation.

Of the Damoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 48 1

2. I observe, secondly, tbat the chief foundation of the
opinion of real possessions may be called in question.

By the principal foundation of this opinion, I mean the
supposition of the liberty of evil spirits, either bad angels,
or others, to rove about near this earth, in the region of
the air.

The Jewish people might be in the right, in supposing,
that neither the punishment of the fallen angels, nor bad
men, was completed before the day of general judgment.
But does it thence follow, that till that time they were at
liberty to go where they thought fit, and to do all the mis
chief they pleased, or were able to execute ? St. Jude speaks
indeed of the fallen angels being * reserved unto judgment."
But how? It is under confinement. His words are, ver. 6,
" And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left
their own habitation, he has reserved in everlasting chains
under darkness, unto the judgment of the great day." And
St. Peter, " God spared not the angels that sinned, but de
livered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto
judgment," 2 ep. ii. 4.

However, possibly, this argument may not be reckoned
conclusive. For though many of the fallen angels are so
confined, yet the expressions of St. Jude and St. Peter need
not to be understood absolutely and universally. For Satan
is spoken of as " our adversary, like a roaring lion walking
about, seeking whom he may devour."

That, therefore, is all which I have chosen to say ; that
the principal foundation of this opinion may be called in
question ; not intending to deny the liberty of Satan, and
some other evil angels, to tempt and annoy men, with the
divine permission. At the same time I perceive not any
clear evidence of the permission of such numbers of evil
angels to act upon this earth, as the common opinion sup
poses.

But if by daemons be meant ether evil spirits, different
from fallen angels, then the supposition of their liberty
seems to be altogether without foundation. In Isa. Ixiii.
16, the Jewish people are introduced by the prophet, own
ing, that " Abraham was ignorant of them, and that Israel
did not acknowledge them." If good men are not allowed
after death to concern themselves in the affairs of this world,
not so much as of their own descendants ; how can it be
reasonable to think, that bad men are permitted after death
to concern themselves in our affairs, for injuring and tor
menting us ?

3. Allowing evil spirits the liberty just mentioned, and
VOL. i. 2 i

482 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

also the power of inflicting some evils on men ; it does not
follow, that ever there were any possessions, in the strict
and gross sense of the word ; that is, evil spirits, actuating
and inhabiting the bodies of living men upon this earth.

4. It does not appear, that the common opinion of pos
sessions has any support and countenance in the Old Tes
tament.

Satan, it is true, is there represented as the great enemy
and seducer of mankind. He tempted Job, and was per
mitted to bring upon him divers losses and calamities. Still
his power received farther enlargement. And then " Satan
went forth from the presence of the Lord, and smote Job
with sore boils, from the sole of his foot unto his crown,"
Job ii. 7. Here is a particular case, and it is very affect
ing. But yet it comes not up to possession : seizing the
body of a man, discomposing his mind, and acting him at
will and pleasure.

1 Sam. xvi. 14, It is said of Saul, " that an evil spirit
from the Lord troubled him ; that is, he contracted a melan
cholic habit and disposition ; for it was often soothed by
music. Said his attendants ; " Let our lord now command
his servants to seek out a man, who is a skilful player on a
harp. And it shall come to pass, that when the evil spirit
from God is upon thee, that he shall play with his hand,
and thou shalt be well." David was sent for ; " And it
came to pass, when the evil spirit from God was upon Saul,
that David took an harp, and played with his hand. So
Saul was refreshed, and was well, and the evil spirit de
parted from him."

Neither this, then, nor any thing else mentioned in the
Old Testament, that I can recollect, countenanceth the sup
position of that terrible case, which seems to be implied in
the real possession of evil spirits.

And it is not unreasonable to conclude hence, that b the
notion of possessions was received by the Jews from the
Chaldaean or Greek philosophers, after the shutting up of
the canon of the Old Testament by the ancient prophets.

5. We find not any instances of possessions by good an
gels, or other good spirits. Why then should possessions
by evil spirits be allowed of? Can it be reasonable to sup-

b * The Jews seem to have received some additional notions concerning evil
« spirits, and their operations, from the Chaldeans ; and, after their return

* from the captivity, to have ascribed many diseases and disorders to these

* invisible agents, besides those which were not to be accounted for by natural

* causes.' Remarks on Ecclesiastical History, Vol. i. p. 243. So says Dr.
Jortin, though he allows, that there were real daemoniacs. See there, p. 14,
and 190.

Of the Dcemoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 483

pose, that Divine Providence would permit evil spirits to
have more powers to do evil, than others have to do good?
There has been an opinion, maintained by some, that every
man has a tutelar or guardian angel. Others have sup
posed, that every man has two angels attending him, one
good, the other bad, each suggesting to him counsels and
warnings, according to their several dispositions, one wish
ing his welfare, the other waiting for his halting. But
these opinions, (though c destitute of all good authority,) do
not amount to the thing which we are speaking of. Nor
are they by any means so unreasonable.

6. Possession by evil spirits is a thing in itself absurd
and impossible, at the least unreasonable and improbable,
and not to be supposed, unless there be clear and full proof
of it. Which I think there is not.

Man consists of soul and body ; and it seems to be un
suitable to the wise methods of Providence, that other spirits
should enter into any man, without his consent, and ac
tuate and govern him. "There is a spirit in man, and the
inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding,"
Job xxxii. 8. "The spirit of a man will sustain his infir
mity, but a wounded spirit who can bear?" Prov. xviii. 14.
The same wise man speaks of " the spirit of a man that go-
eth upward," Eccl. iii. 21. And St. Paul, " What man
knoweth the thing's of a man, save the spirit of man that is
in him," 1 Cor. ii. 11. I refer also to Matt. x. 28; 1 Thess.
v. 23 ; 2 Tim. iv. 22 ; Heb. xii. 9 ; not now to take notice of
any other places.

The scripture therefore, in agreement with reason, and d
the general persuasion of mankind, supposes one soul or
spirit in a man. And for other spirits to subsist therewith,
and to control and actuate all his powers and members, is
an incongruity that ought not to be admitted.

7. Real possessions seem inconsistent with the goodness
of God.

I say, it seems to be inconsistent with the wisdom and
goodness of the Divine government, to allow of possessions,
in the gross meaning of the word. If, indeed, there were
any clear and undeniable evidences of such a thing, we
should be willing to do our best, to reconcile it to wisdom
and goodness. But as there is not, that I know of, any clear
and undoubted evidence of this fact, and the thing appears
to be very strange and shocking ; I apprehend we may say,

c See Whitby upon Matt, xviii. 10, and Acts xii. 9.
d Mens sana in corpore sano.

484 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

it appears to be inconsistent with the wisdom and goodness
of God.

For let any man think with himself, if it be not a strange
and hard case, for a man to be put into the power of evil
spirits : or for apostate angels, or other impure arid wicked
spirits, one or more of them, to be allowed to take possession
of him, and to teaze and torment him as they think fit. Is
this suited to that state of trial in which we now are ? Such
unhappy persons, it is true, are not cast into hell, nor fixed
in a state of damnation. But apostate angels, or other in
fernal spirits, are supposed to be permitted to come to him,
seize on him, torment, and distress him, and that for many
years together.

Is this a supposition that should be easily made or al
lowed of? Can we fairly reconcile this to the wisdom and
equity of the Divine government?

Besides, from many things said in the gospels it appears,
that divers of the persons there spoken of, as ' having evil
spirits/ were not the worst of men. Yea, for any thing we
can perceive, divers of them were honest, virtuous persons.
And some had laboured under those distempers, commonly
ascribed to evil spirits, from their youth, or from childhood,
before they can be supposed to have been guilty of great
and heinous transgressions.

This argument, if it does not hold against the supposition,
that evil spirits may be sometimes permitted to inflict dis
eases, certainly has a good deal of force against posses
sions, especially in the gross sense, in which they have been
understood and allowed of by some in late times.

8. Another argument against possessions, arises from the
manner in which the persons, said to have unclean spirits,
speak of our Lord Jesus Christ.

For such persons did often bear an honourable testimony
to our Lord; Luke iv. 41, " And demons also came out of
many, crying out, and saying, Thou art the Christ, the Son
of God." But it is incredible, that Satan, or any other evil
spirits under his influence and direction, should freely and
cheerfully bear witness to our Lord, as the Christ.

When the pharisees reviled him, and said, that he cast
out daemons by Beelzebub the prince of daemons, our Lord
confuted that reflection and charge, by showing, that the
thing was very unlikely. So in Matt. xii. 25, 28, and else
where. For the doctrine taught by our Lord being con
trary to the kingdom and interest of Satan, it was altoge
ther improbable, that so subtle and malicious a spirit should
concur with him for the support of it.

Of the D&moniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 485

In like manner it is incredible, that any unclean spirits
should cheerfully bear testimony to Jesus, as the Christ, the
Son of God. Therefore that profession, or declaration, did
not proceed from such spirits, but from the unhappy dis
eased persons, who, under their melancholic affections,
thought themselves to have daemons, in conformity to the
prevailing1 opinion, though they had not.

This is a much more reasonable way of accounting for
this matter, than to suppose, that evil spirits openly pro
fessed Jesus to be the Christ, the Son of God.

Indeed this appears to me a very forcible argument : I
have been sometimes apt to think, that this consideration
has been overlooked by learned and pious men, who have
so readily admitted real possessions.

However, it may be here said, that possibly this testimony
was not free and voluntary, but constrained and compelled.
To which I answer, that this cannot be said with good rea
son. Our Lord certainly did not constrain any such to bear
that testimony to him, and speak so of him ; for he never
received it, but disallowed of it, and checked it: though af
terwards, when those persons were by his mighty power
delivered from the indispositions under which they had la
boured, he was not unwilling that they should bear witness
to him, as we see in the case before us; "He bid the man
go home to his friends, and tell them, how great things the
Lord had done for him, and had compassion on him."

9. All those persons who are spoken of as having daemons,
or an unclean spirit, had some bodily indisposition. Nor
does it appear clearly from their history, that there was any
thing beside such indisposition.

That all these people had some bodily indisposition is
manifest, and cannot be denied by any. Some laboured
under distraction, as the men in the country of the Gada-
renes ; others had other disorders. St. Peter, Acts x. 38,
gives this general account of our Lord's miraculous works :
" Who went about doing good, and healing all that were
oppressed of the devil." Therefore they who were sup
posed to be under the oppression of Satan, had distempers
which our Lord healed. Observable are the words of St.
Matthew, ch. iv. 24 ; " And his fame went throughout all
Syria, and they brought unto him all sick people, that
were taken with divers diseases, and torments, and those
which were possessed of daemons," or dcemoniacs, and
" those that were lunatic, and those that had the palsy,
and he healed them."

These persons, therefore, are reckoned up among other

486 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

sick people, and they are said to be * healed/ or * cured/
by the Lord Jesus, when brought to him.

Nor does it appear, from the history of these cases, that
there was any thing more than bodily indispositions, and
that discomposure of mind, which usually accompanies
them.

Let us observe the history of the young man, first brought
to the disciples, when our Lord was in the mount, and then
to himself, when he was come down, and is related by the
first three evangelists.

Matt. xvii. 14, 15; " And when they were come to the
multitude, there came to him a certain man, kneeling down
to him, and saying, Lord, have mercy on my son, for he is
lunatic, and sore vexed. For oft-times he falleth into the
fire, and oft into the water. And I brought him to thy
disciples, and they could not cure him."

That is the whole description of the case : but undoubt
edly the affliction was supposed to be owing to an evil
spirit. Therefore the cure is thus related by the same
evangelist : " And Jesus rebuked the daemon, and he de
parted out of him, and the child was cured from that very
hour," ver. 18.

In the description, then, of this distemper, which appears
to have been the epilepsy, or falling sickness, the parent
says, " his child was lunatic, and sore vexed :" that is, his
distemper was influenced by the changes of the moon, and
the fits, or paroxysms, were very violent, and more violent
at some seasons than others. And does it not use to be so
in such cases? What necessity is there then for the suppo
sition of the agency or interposition of evil spirits?

In Mark ix. 17, 18, the same case is represented in this
manner: " One of the multitude answered, I have brought
unto thee my son, which has a dumb spirit. And whereso
ever he taketh him, he foameth, and gnasheth with his teeth,
and pineth away. And I spake to thy disciples, that they
should cast him out, and they could not." Ver. 20, " And
they brought him to him. And when he saw him, straight
way the spirit tare him, and he fell on the ground, and
wallowed, foaming." It was a grievous epilepsy, a danger
ous indisposition, the convulsions were sometimes extremely
violent, so that the young man had begun to pine away.

In St. Luke, cli. ix. 38, 39, the parent says, " Master, I
beseech thee, look upon my son, for he is my only child.
And lo a spirit taketh him, and he suddenly crieth out, and
it teareth him, that he foameth again, and bruising him,
hardly departeth from him." Ver 42, " And as he was yet

Of the Daemoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 487

coming, the daemon threw him down, and tare him. And
Jesus rebuked the unclean spirit, and healed the child, and
delivered him again to his father."

It was a sad epileptical disease. The convulsions were
very violent ; the fits were sometimes severe and long ; in
somuch that his friends feared he would never get out of
them, but die away in them ; a thing not uncommon still in
such cases. And yet we do not now, generally, introduce
evil spirits as the causes of them.

This, however, was a grievous and dangerous epilepsy.
And the cure performed by our Lord was a great and gra
cious work.

10. There were some in ancient times, who were of
opinion, that those called daemoniacs were diseased only.

Undoubtedly, the other was the more prevailing opinion,
but not universal. The sadducees among the Jews must
have had different apprehensions about these cases. But I
choose not to take any particular notice of men, who were
so unreasonable as to deny the existence of angels and sepa
rate spirits. See Acts xxiii. 8.

I shall however observe what is said by Origen, who
Jived about two hundred years after our Lord's ascension,
in his Commentary upon St. Matthew's gospel. He is
treating of the miracle wrought by our Lord upon the young
man, brought to Christ by his father, after he was come
down from the mount : of which we spoke just now.
Origen himself believed the influence of daemons in such
cases. But he says, * That e physicians endeavoured to ac-
* count for them in a natural way ; not allowing the agency
' of any impure spirits, but calling them bodily distempers.'
So said physicians in those times ; and they must be reck
oned as good judges as any.

Plotinus, a celebrated heathen philosopher, who flourished
about the middle of the third century, blames some, who f
ascribed to daemons diseases, which, as he says, may be ac
counted for in an ordinary way, and indeed are owing to
fatigue, excess, indigestion, and other causes either internal
or external, and are oftentimes cured by medicines.

And Philostorgius, an ecclesiastical historian, at the be-

larpoi fjitv ovv ^voioXoyftraxrav, art nrjfie cucaOaprov revived tivai vofju-
Kara TOTTOV, aXXa (tw/uariKov <ru/J7rrwjua, K- X. In Matt. Tom. xm. vol.
i. p. 311. Huet. vol. iii. p. 577. Bened.

f Nuv de curo^rjaaptvoi, rag voaag Saifiovia uvcu - TSQ pivroi tvtypoisuv-
raq SK av TTttOoitv, WQ &•% ai vocroi rag airiaq f%8(Tiv, rj KaparoiQ, V irXvfffiovais,
t] tvdttaic, rj <nj4/e<rt, icai 6Xw£ jutra/3oXai£ r} &<*>Qiv rv\v apxrjv, t] svdoOtv Xa/3«-
aaif. A)jX8<7i dt *ai ai Sipcnrtiai avruv, »c. X. Plotin. Eim. 2. lib. ix. cap. 14.

488 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

ginning of the fifth century, mentions s one Posidonius, a
learned physician, whom he knew, who ascribed all the bad
symptoms of those called dsemoniacs to natural causes; and
did not believe, that daemons had power to torment men,
though he did not deny their existence. That Posidonius
seems to have been a Christian.

I might show, that this has likewise been the opinion of
some judicious, and thoughtful, and pious men of late times.
But as 1 suppose you to be rather determined by reason
than authority, I forbear to insist on their judgment.

I therefore would recommend to your consideration the
observations which have been now mentioned : which seem
to me to render it very probable, that the afflictions, which
those laboured under, who among the Jews were said to
have a daemon, or unclean spirit, were mere bodily dis
tempers and indispositions. They are at least, so far as I
am able to judge, cogent arguments against possessions, in
the gross sense of the word, as understood by some learned
men of late times.

There are however some difficulties attending this suppo
sition, which shall be taken notice of hereafter.

For the present, we may do well to recollect some apos
tolical observations and admonitions. " Knowledge puffeth
up, but charity edifietb," 1 Cor. viii. 1. " Speaking the
truth in love, let us grow up into him in all things, which
is the head, even Christ," Eph. iv. 15.

Then are our minds rightly tempered in our inquiries
after the true nature of things, when our first and greatest
care is to please and glorify God ; when we are humble
and diffident, sensible of the weakness of our capacities,
and of our liableness to err; when we are disposed to think
and judge according to evidence, and to embrace that as
true, which appears to be founded in reason : when still we
are willing to exercise charity and forbearance toward such
as differ from us, and do not see things exactly in the same
light that we do.

Some are greatly delighted with simplicity in all things.
They enter not into any speculations about the orders, the
powers, the ranks, or ceconomy of invisible beings. Nor
do they willingly admit their agency and interposition in
human affairs in this life, our time and state of trial.
Others love to multiply beings ; and an intricate system,

s QtaaaffOai de TOV Hoatiduviov (v larpiicg SicnrptiTovTa.. Aeyti & avrov
SK op9ti)c; 8%i datfjiovwv eTriOtcrti T&Q avQpMTrsQ £K/3aK%fU£cr0ai, vypwv 8e
^vfiiav TO 7TttOo£ epya%ea9cu' fj,r] $£ yap tivai TO Trapairav
av&pwirw Qvaiv tTrnpta&Gav. Philost. 1. viii. cap. 10.

Of the Demoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 489

with a great variety of movements, pleaseth them best.
They like frequent, jor continual interpositions of good and
bad spirits ; and scarcely any thing happens in the world,
but they ascribe it to their influence and causality.

Let every one be satisfied in his own mind, after serious
and diligent inquiry: but let us take care, that by intro
ducing numerous inferior and intermediate beings, and their
agency, we do not derogate from the Divine empire and
government, as supreme over all causes and things, visible
and invisible.

And let us remain fully persuaded, that our blessed Lord's
doctrine, authority, and character, were supported and at
tested by numerous miracles performed by him, in healing
every disease and affliction to which the human frame is
exposed, and in raising the dead. And that, being himself
raised from the dead, and ascended to heaven, and living
for ever, he is able to bestow eternal life upon all those, who
sincerely obey the reasonable precepts of true holiness de
livered by him.

DISCOURSE IV.

MARK v. 19.

Howbeit Jesus suffered him not, lut saith unto him, Go
home to thy friends, and tell them how great things the
Lord hath done for thee, and hath had compassion on
thee.

I HAVE distinctly explained and improved the great cure,
and miraculous work here referred to. And the last time it
was observed, that some are inclined to think, that the
afflictions which they laboured under who are spoken of as
having evil spirits, were mere bodily diseases and indispo
sitions : though it was then the prevailing opinion, that they
were under the power and influence of some evil spirit.
And those persons themselves, and their friends, attributing
their distempers to Satan, and daemons under him, our
Saviour sometimes adapts his expressions to that opinion,
without countenancing or approving it.

In favour of that sentiment divers arguments and consi
derations were proposed, taken from the reason of things,

490 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

from the Old Testament, and from the history and descrip
tion of these very persons, and their cases, as recorded in the
New Testament.

TV. What now remains to be spoken to is the fourth and
last head relating to this subject, the objections against the
fore-mentioned opinion, or the arguments in favour of real
possessions.

I shall take notice of, and consider these four.

1. There might be such cases in former times, though
there are now none.

2. There are divers things said of those persons, who were
called doemoniacs, which are very difficult, or even impos
sible to be accounted for, but by the supposition of real
possessions, or the operation and interposition of evil
spirits.

3. The evangelists appear to have believed, that these per
sons had really one or more unclean spirits.

4. Our Lord himself does not oppose the opinion of real
possessions, as he would have done, it is likely, if not true.

Of these in order.

1. Obj. In the first place, it is said, that there might be
such cases in former times, though there are none now.

Possibly such things may not be allowed of in the com
mon and ordinary course of Divine Providence; but yet
might be permitted at the time of our Saviour's appearance,
when there was an uncommon and effectual remedy at hand.
Bad angels, or other evil spirits, might be then suffered to
leave their confinement, and come abroad, and inflict griev
ous distempers upon men, especially in the land of Judea
and near it ; that the power of Jesus might be rendered
more conspicuous, by snowing his authority over them, and
removing by his word those evils which they had inflicted,
and causing those malignant spirits to leave those persons
of whom they had taken possession.

To which I answer, that this supposition does not suit the
histories related in the gospels : for these cases do not there
appear to be extraordinary, but are looked upon by every
body as ordinary and usual things. No one expresseth a
surprise, that such people are brought to Jesus. His ene
mies never mention it as a reproach and dishonour to him,
that their country was then infested with evil spirits. If
people had been now all on a sudden seized with disorders,
never heard of among them before, and if such cases had
been numerous, would it not have occasioned the utmost
astonishment? Would it not have raised a loud and general
clamour? Would they not have thought they had indeed good

Of the Da-maniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 491

reason to say, when they saw the cures performed by Jesus
and his disciples, that there was a combination between
them, and some malignant powers ? They first brought them
in among them into the country, and then they cast them out
and drove them away again. But there was no ground for
such a charge : it was never mentioned : it was impossible
to be made: for such cases were well known, and are
spoken of by other writers contemporary with the evange
lists, by Joseph us and others, as common in Judea and else
where, not only at that time, but also before and afterwards,
as was observed by us in a preceding discourse.

The Jews had among them methods of exorcising spirits,
or curing the diseases which they were supposed to inflict:
though possibly with but little success, any farther than
they were assisted by the art of medicine. However, as
exorcisms had been in use among them, they afford proof,
that such cases, and the opinion concerning them, were
known before our Saviour's appearance in the world.

2. Obj. It is said, that divers things appear in the history
of these persons, which are very difficult, if not impossible
to be accounted for, but upon the supposition of real posses
sions, or at least the interposition and operations of evil
spirits.

(1.) First of all it may be said : if there was no agency
of evil spirits, how came it to pass, that this opinion so pre
vailed as it did ; and how came it, that many persons
thought themselves to be possessed by evil spirits? The
man at the tombs when asked by Jesus what was his name,
answered, " Legion, for we are many." And divers brought
their children or other friends, to Christ, desiring him to have
mercy on them, because an evil spirit afflicted and tormented
them.

To which I answer; It is no uncommon thing* for opinions
to prevail in the world which have no solid foundation.
How many have been disposed to ascribe the diseases of the
human body, and other disastrous events in the world, to the
planets, or other stars ! It was for a long time a very common
opinion, that spirits of inferior orders, in a manner, filled the
region of the air ; and many distempers were ascribed to their
influence. When such an opinion prevailed, it was very
likely that some who fell under grievous distempers, should
think themselves harassed and tormented by evil spirits, and
upon some occasions speak in conformity to their inward
apprehensions. This, particularly, was the case with the
man called Legion, and perhaps of many others who were
under a deep melancholy.

492 Supplement to tlie First Part of the Credibility.

(2.) It is urged ; how came these persons who are said to
have evil spirits, to know Jesus to be the Christ, if they were
not under the influence of evil spirits, of great knowledge,
as well as much power ? " And there was in their synagogue,
[at Capernaum,] a man with an unclean spirit, and he cried
out, saying, Let us alone, what have we to do with thee, thou
Jesus of Nazareth? Art thou come to destroy us? I know
thee, who thou art, the holy one of God," Mark i. 23, 24.
Compare Luke iv. 33, 34. And the two men, in the country
of the Gadarenes, " cried out, saying, What liave \ve to do
with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God ? Art thou come hither
to torment us before the time?" Matt. viii. 29.

To which I beg leave to answer ; it seems to me, that
these persons knew Jesus to be the Christ, the Son of God,
in the same way that others did. The expectation of the
coming of the Messiah had been for some while very com
mon, and even universal, founded upon just interpretations
of the ancient prophets, which were publicly read in the
synagogues, and were in the hands of all men. These peo
ple, before they were seized with the disorders which they
now laboured under, were well apprized of the common
notions concerning the greatness of the Messiah, which were
allowed by the Jews in general.

We ought likewise to recollect, that none of the miracles
recorded by the first three evangelists, were performed by
our Lord till after the commencement of his public ministry,
that is, the most public and open part of it. This is evident
from St. John's gospel, compared with the rest. The first
three evangelists say but little of our Lord's ministry, till
after John was cast into prison : but before that, as St. John
assures us, he had wrought divers miracles, and had begun
to gather disciples. Moreover, some of the miracles recorded
by the first three evangelists, might be wrought, and some
of our Lord's excellent discourses spoken by him, before
any of those persons said to have an unclean spirit, made
acknowledgments of our Lord's great character.

The expectation of the Messiah being general, and John
the Baptist having preached in the most public manner,
and declared to all, that the great person whom they look
ed for was at hand, and would soon appear among them ;
and our Lord beginning to speak as no man ever spake
before, and doing many great and miraculous works, show
ing forth his glory, and many believing on him, and his
fame being very great in Judea, and in neighbouring places ;
no man could be altogether ignorant of him. It is therefore
not at all strange, that these diseased persons should, in

Of the Demoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 493

their way, bear testimony to him. All those, said to have
evil spirits, as we readily perceive, were not discomposed in
mind ; many of them were epileptical or paralytical. These
undoubtedly enjoyed, at some seasons, the free use of their
senses and understandings, and might discern the evi
dences of our Lord's great character; and being sincere and
honest, might be disposed to own it, and declare the sense
of their minds. But thinking their distempers to be owing
to the operation and influence of evil spirits, they affect to
speak in their name.

As for the men in the country of the Gadarenes, who
were disordered in their minds, and yet acknowledged Jesus
to be the Christ, the thing may be thought more difficult.
But, as just said, before they were seized with that distem
per, they were acquainted with the expectation of the Mes
siah, and the general apprehensions concerning his charac
ter ; and before now they had heard of Jesus. Many who
labour under that indisposition are honest and acute: they
have also some intervals of ease : nor are they unreasonable
in every respect ; but setting aside some particular fancy,
can reason and argue consistently enough. It therefore is
not impossible, nor improbable, that some labouring under
this affliction, having heard of the fame of Jesus, who was
much talked of every where, should think, and then be dis
posed to speak, honourably of him.

(3.) The escape of the man called Legion from his con
finement, it is argued, is a proof of the interposition of evil
spirits of more than human power, and not to be otherwise
accounted for. For the evangelist Mark says, " that no
man could bind him, no, not with chains. For he had been
often bound with fetters and chains, and the chains had
been plucked asunder, and the fetters broken in pieces.
Neither could any man tame him," chap. v. 3, 4.

But, as seems to me, the escape of such a person from his
confinement, needs not to be reckoned so very extraordinary
a thing, when it is well known, that persons in the like dis
orders have at some seasons uncommon strength.

Moreover, I apprehend that many do imprudently mag
nify the security with which that man had been confined.
We are too apt, inconsiderately, to judge of former times
by our own. It is likely, that great improvements have
been made in late ages, in the method of treating people in
that unhappy circumstance.

Hospitals for the relief and cure of such as labour under
this and other grievous distempers, may be said to be a

494 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

Christian institution.1 They owe their original to that be
nevolence, which Christian principles inspire men with to
ward their fellow-creatures. In those houses where there is
constant attendance, the security must be much greater than
in other places. Supposing there was, for some short
season, a want of attention to this person, the bands with
which he was fastened, whether of metal or cord, with his
continual and violent motion \vould fret and wear, and then
break and burst asunder: and when he felt himself at li
berty, his melancholic apprehensions would carry him to
the desolate and solitary place where our Lord found him.

(4.) The loss of the swine is reckoned unaccountable,
but upon the supposition of a real possession, and the in
terposition of many evil spirits.

It may be remembered, thatb formerly we mentioned
three several ways of accounting for that event. One, sup
posing that the distraction which the man had laboured
under, was transferred by our Lord from him to the swine.
Another, that the daemons, leaving the man at Christ's
order, did with his permission take possession of the swine,
and hurry them down the precipice : the third, that the lu
natic man, or men, drove the swine into the lake.

Several reasons were then offered against the first of those
opinions. There remain therefore the other two only to be
now considered.

Every one should judge for himself. But to me it ap
pears most probable, that this was done by the man him
self, called Legion, either alone, or with the joint assist
ance of the other, his companion in affliction. For this
miracle, as was observed before, was performed by our
Lord with great deliberation. Some time passed between
our Lord's signifying his will and pleasure, that the evil
spirits should depart, or that the man should be cured, and
his perfect recovery. Some things may be reasonably sup
posed by us, which are not inserted in such a relation as
this. When the people of the neighbouring city had been
informed of the cure of this unhappy person, as St. Mark
assures us, " they come to Jesus, and see him that was pos
sessed with a daemon, and had the Legion, sitting, and
clothed, and in his right mind." Clothing therefore had
been brought to him : but the evangelist does not say how
it was procured ; because indeed it is needless to relate
particularly what may be easily supposed.

a See the Bishop of Oxford's Sermon preached before the Governors of the
London Hospital, in the year 1754, p. 8—11. b See before, p. 456, 457.

Of the Damoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 495

The distraction under which this man laboured, was very
grievous and outrageous ; he was a hideous form, and his
action was very violent. When he had conceived the
thought of gratifying the evil spirits, by which he imagined
himself to be possessed, with the destruction of the swine, he
would without much difficulty drive them off the precipice.
If some few of them were put in motion, the whole herd
would follow. Nor is it unlikely, that the other person, his
companion in affliction, joined his assistance ; for St. Mat
thew speaks of two. They invested the herd then on each
side, and thus drove them before them.

This appears to me a much more reasonable way of
accounting for the loss of the swine, than to suppose, that c
our blessed Lord accepted and granted the petition of evil
spirits.

(5.) The case of Mary Magdalene may create a difficulty
in the minds of some : and it may be inquired, what notion
we ought to have of it, since it is said, that " out of her
went seven daemons?" Is not this an evident proof of the
reality of possessions ? See Mark xvi. 9; Luke viii. 2.

To which I answer, that many of late time have supposed
Mary Magdalene to be the woman mentioned by St. Luke
in the seventh chapter of his gospel, who is there spoken
of as a ' sinner,' who, when our Lord was in the house of
Simon the pharisee, came to him, and gave proof of repent
ance. For which reason Mary Magdalene is often set forth
as a remarkable example of repentance.

But that opinion, so far as I am able to judge, is entirely
without foundation in the gospels. There is no reason at
all to think, that Mary Magdalene and that woman are one
and the same.

What was Mary's case appears in general by St. Luke's
account, chap. viii. 1, 2. " He went through every city and
village, preaching the glad tidings of the kingdom of God.
And the twelve were with him, and certain women, which
had been healed of evil spirits, and infirmities ; Mary, called
Magdalene, out of whom went seven daemons, and others."
Here Mary is reckoned among those whom our Lord had
' healed of infirmities,' and such infirmities as were as
cribed to evil spirits.

But I do not think we can with certainty conclude from
those words, what was her particular affliction ; because
the Jews in those times imputed a great variety of distem
pers to the influence of daemons. But though we dare not
say positively what was her case, whether a discomposed
c See before, p. 457, 458. and note.

496 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

frame of mind, or epilepsy, or somewhat else ; it appears to
me very evident, that some natural, not moral distemper, is
thereby intended ; and that by ' seven daemons' is meant
many, a certain number being put for an uncertain. It was
supposed, as in the case of the man who called himself
Leg-ion, that more than one daemon, or unclean spirit, was
concerned in inflicting, or aggravating the infirmity, which
she had been afflicted with, and which our blessed Lord
graciously removed.

(6.) The next thing which I shall take notice of, is the
history of an affair at Ephesus, Acts xix. 10 — 17, " And this
continued by the space of two years, so that all they which
dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews
and Greeks. And God wrought special miracles by the
hands of Paul : so that from his body were brought unto
the sick handkerchiefs and aprons, and the diseases departed
from them, and the evil spirits went out of them. Then
certain of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to
call over them that had evil spirits the name of the Lord
Jesus, saying, We adjure you by Jesus, whom Paul
preacheth. And there were seven sons of one Sceva, a Jew,
and chief of the priests, which did so. And the evil spirit
answered, and said, Jesus 1 know, and Paul I know ; but
who are ye ? And the man in whom the evil spirit was,
leaped on them and overcame them, and prevailed against
them : so that they fled out of the house naked and wound
ed. And this was known to all the Jews, and Greeks also,
dwelling* at Ephesus. And fear fell on them all, and the
name of the Lord Jesus was magnified."

This history might afford occasion for many remarks ; as
that daeinoniacs were common among Gentiles, and in hea
then countries, as well as among the Jews in Judea : that
the Jews practised exorcisms at home and abroad : and that
some, who took upon them the office of exorcists, were men
of indifferent characters, and were impostors.

But what I allege this passage for, and which we are
chiefly to attend to, is the argument which it affords for real
possessions, or the influence of. malignant powerful spirits.
For this man speaks as if he were actuated by some such
beings ; moreover he shows great force and activity ; he
alone overcomes several men at once.

Nevertheless, in my opinion, here is far from being any
sufficient evidence of the presence or power of invisible
beings. The knowledge which the man shows, is common
and ordinary. St. Paul had before this time wrought many
miracles at Ephesus, in the name of Jesus, in curing all

Of the Demoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 497

kinds of diseases : and the man before us was convinced of
the truth and greatness of divers of the works which he had
either seen or heard of.

When therefore these Jewish exorcists came to him, and
made an attempt to give him relief under the indisposition
with which he was afflicted, and he found no benefit from
all their exorcisms ; he was enraged, and treats them as
hateful deceivers, and says, " Jesus I know, and Paul T
know ; but who are ye ?" No evil spirit, under the direction
of Satan, the prince of evil spirits, would bear such a testi
mony to Jesus and his apostles. But it is the honest, under
standing man, who expresses the sense of his own mind.

Says St. Luke, " And the man, in whom the evil spirit
was," that is, in whom there was supposed to be an evil
spirit, " leapt on them, and overcame them, and prevailed :"
which is not at all hard to conceive, considering his just
indignation, and that this assault was unexpected. The
exorcists were unprovided for defence, and at the same time
were dispirited by fear and shame, at the disappointment
which they had met with, and the detection of their impos
ture, and the inefficacy of their boasted skill.

As St. Luke says, " fear fell on all, and the name of the
Lord Jesus was magnified." And very justly, after so many
miracles wrought by Paul, and the manifest proof now af
forded of the insufficiency of those methods of cure, which
were most depended upon.

(7.) There is one thing more to be taken notice of by us,
before we leave this head. We must go back for it to the
xvith chapter of the Acts. But I have reserved it for this
place, it seeming to some, one of the strongest proofs in the
New Testament in behalf of real possessions. It was at
Philippi in Macedonia. Says St. Luke : " And it came to
pass, as we went to prayer." It might as well be rendered,
" As we went to the oratory," or the Jewish synagogue, a
little way out of the city, by the river side. " As we went
to the oratory, a certain damsel, possessed with a spirit of
divination, met us, which brought her masters much gain
by soothsaying. The same followed Paul and us, and cried,
saying, These men are the servants of the most high God,
which show unto us the way of salvation. And this she did
many days. But Paul being grieved, turned, and said to
the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to
come out of her. And he came out the same hour. And
when her masters saw, that the hope of their gains was gone,
they caught Paul and Silas, and urew them into the market
place, unto the rulers. And brought them to the magis-

VOL. I. 2 K

493 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

trates, saying, These men, being Jews, do exceedingly trou
ble our city. And teach customs, which are not lawful for
us to receive, neither to observe, being Romans," Acts xvi.
16 — 21. And the magistrates being exasperated by the
clamour of these men, they ordered Paul and Silas to be
beaten, and shut up in prison.

" A certain damsel, possessed with a spirit of divination,"
literally, * having a spirit of Python.' St. Luke, undoubt
edly, makes use of the common heathen appellation. And
the phrase seems to denote, that this woman was supposed to
bave the same spirit of Python, or Apollo, that delivered
oracles in the name of Apollo in the Pythian temple. In
short, by the help of this maid-servant, her masters were sup
posed to be able to deliver out oracles, and to answer all
manner of questions, and foretell future events concerning
those who consulted them ; hereby her owners had much
gain.

And many there are in our time, who still think, this
woman had in her a spirit of divination, and that she was
able to foretell futurities.

They who are of this opinion, express themselves after
this manner. ' Thed ancient Greeks and Romans possessed
' slaves of all professions, philosophers, rhetoricians, gram-

* marians, physicians, as well as persons bred up to every
' sort of mechanic trade. Among the rest, they sometimes
' happened to have slaves that were astrologers, or magicians,
' or diviners. E^affTpifjLvOoi, or those who had the spirit of

* Python, were doubtless, very rare, and the purchase of

* such an one must have been exceeding high. The maid-
' servant, here mentioned, is represented as having more than

* one owner. Her price, it is likely, was too great to be ad-

* vanced by a single person. At least no one cared to risk so
' large a sum upon the uncertainty of a life. For though she
4 brought much gain, how soon might it be cut off by her

* decease?' It is farther said, ' that the6 reputation of this

* woman was established. There was a general belief, that

* she did foretell things, and there was a great concourse of

* people after her, to make inquiry into their future for-
4 tunes.' So say f those persons who are of that opinion.

d Biscoe upon the Acts, p. 342, 343. e The same, p. 296.

f * The plain truth therefore is, St. Paul prevented her future prophesying.
He cast out the spirit which spake within her, so that she was no more heard
to speak as from her belly or breast. Her masters soon perceived that she
was no longer inspired or possessed, that she could now utter no more divi
nations or prophecies ; and therefore all hope of their gains from her, whether
in Philippi, or any other city, was wholly gone.' The same, p. 297, 298.
See also Dr. Jortin's Remarks upon Ecclesiastical History, Vol. i. p. 123, 124.

Of the Damoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 499

Upon which I observe, that unquestionably here was a
sort of oracle, for such things were common in heathen
countries, not only carried on by their priests in the temples
of their deities, but also by others in other places. But, as
I think, there is good reason to believe, that all those ora
cles in general were cheats and impostures, the effects of
human skill and contrivance only ; so I think, there was a
like cheat and imposture in this case. But it may not be
easy to say exactly wherein the imposture consisted.

It has been supposed, that the woman was a slave, and
the joint property of several ; which might be. But none
of those oracles could be carried on with credit, without a
combination, for getting intelligence, and for the sake of other
transactions at the office. And whether she was a slave,
or a hired servant, does not clearly appear.

I make no question, that the masters were artful and de
ceitful : but, possibly, the woman was honest. If she had
once been otherwise, she was seized with compunction, when
she declared Paul and his companions to be " servants of
the most high God." But that would not cure her distem
per: for some distemper she had, which Paul removed.

It seems to me not improbable, that this woman laboured
under some indisposition ; possibly, some kind of melan
choly, which was imputed to the influence of a daemon, and
particularly to Apollo, as was common among* heathen peo^
pie. The masters, pretending that hereby she was qualified
to resolve all manner of questions, set up an oracle at Phi-
lippi, and delivered out answers, as if received from the
spirit of Python. And their project was carried on very
artfully, insomuch, that they had a good deal of employment,
and many inquirers, and made great gain.

But the maid being honest, or at least well disposed, and
hearing of Paul, what doctrine he taught, and what works
he performed ; or perhaps out of curiosity attending at a
distance, and making inquiries after him, she was convinced,
and then openly declared, that he and his companions were
" servants of the most high God." Or, she might have
received information of Paul from her masters. For no
people were so inquisitive, and so careful to get early intel
ligence, as the conductors of those & oracles. But the in
formation given her (if she received it from them) had a
different effect from what was intended. However, her high
character of Paul did not throw her masters into despair,
that we can perceive.. But she having often followed Paul,
and he not valuing such a testimony, and being touched
« Vid. Luciani Alexander, seu Pseudomantis.
2 K 2

500 * Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

with compassion for the maid, under her melancholic affec
tion, adapting1 his expressions to the common opinion about
her, " said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of
Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same
hour." And thereupon the woman immediately became com
posed and cheerful. This happy alteration being- evident, and
public, her masters' hope of farther gain by her was ruined.

This appears to me to have been the case : nor can it be
thought, that a spirit of Python should publicly say what
tended to diminish a regard for himself, and all heathen
deities in general.

But I may not stay to allege at large the proofs which
might be offered, that the heathen oracles, and such as were
said to speak by the spirit of Python, were the impostures
of artful men, unsupported by invisible beings of vast know
ledge and power, as some have supposed.

I only observe, that what is here advanced is agreeable (o
the sentiments of the ancient prophets, who continually re
present heathen idols as altogether insignificant and vain ;
and did not imagine, that they were inhabited by invisible
beings, who could astonish their worshippers with real won
ders, and almost rival the true Deity. Isa. xli. 21 — 24,
" Produce your cause, saith the Lord ; bring forth your
strong reasons, saith the King of Jacob. Let them show
the fonner things, what they be, that we may consider them,
and know the latter end of them." Let them show the ac
complishment of any events, conformably to their predic
tions in time past. " Or declare us, now, things to come.
Show the things that are to come hereafter, that we may
know ye are gods. Yea, do good, or do evil, that we may
be dismayed, and behold it together. Behold ye are of no
thing, and your work of nought : an abomination is he, that
chooseth you." Compare Isa. xl. 18 — 20.

Jer. x. 3 — 5, " For the customs of the people are vain ;
for one cutteth a tree out of the forest (the work of the hands
of the workman) with the axe. They deck it with silver
and with gold, the,y fasten it with nails and hammers, that
it move not. They are upright, as the palm-tree, but speak
not : they must needs be borne, because they cannot go :
be not afraid of them, for they cannot do evil, neither is it
in them to do good."

Isa. xliv. 9, " They that make a graven image, are all of
them vanity. 10, Who hath formed a god, or molten a
graven image, that is profitable for nothing? 12, The
smith with the tongs both worketh in the coals, and fashion-
eth it with hammers," and what follows to the end of ver.

Of the Demoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 501

17, " He burneth part thereof in the fire: with part thereof
he eateth flesh : he roasteth roast, and is satisfied. And
the residue thereof he maketh a god, even his graven image:
he falleth down to it, and prayeth unto it, and saith, De
liver me, for thou art my god."

Psal. cxv. 3 — 8, " But our God is in the heavens, he hath
done whatsoever he pleased. Their idols are silver and
gold, the work of men's hands. They have mouths, but
they speak not ; eyes have they, but they see not. They
have ears, but they hear not. They have hands, but they
handle not; feet have they, but they walk not; neither
speak they through their throat." They have not the faculty
of speech. " They that make them, are like unto them.
So is every one, that trusteth in them." Compare Ps.
cxxxv. 15— -18.

Psal. xcvii. 7, " Confounded be all they that serve graven
images, that boast themselves of idols."

Dan. v. 4, " They drank wine, and praised the gods of
gold, and of silver, of brass, of iron, of wood, and of stone.
Ver. 23, And thou hast praised the gods of silver and gold,
of brass, iron, wood, and stone, which see not, nor hear, nor
know : and the God, in whose hand thy breath is, and
whose are all thy ways, hast thou not glorified."

Habakkuk ii. 18, 19, " What profiteth the graven image,
that the maker of his work trusteth therein, to make him
dumb idols ? Woe unto him that saith to the wood, Awake :
to the dumb stone, Arise, it shall teach. It is laid over
with gold and silver, and there is no breath at all in the
midst of it."

Justly therefore does the prophet say, " the stock is a
doctrine of vanities," Jer. x. 8. Compare Jer. ii. 27, and
Isa. xliv. 19. And I refer to the sixth chapter of the apo
cryphal book of Baruch.

Acts xvii. 29, " We ought not to think, that the Godhead
is like unto gold, or silver, or stone graven by art, and man's
device." So says St. Paul, preaching at Athens. He
does not flatter them : he plainly intimates, that their conse
crated images consisted only of earthly materials, polished by
the hand of the artificer.

1 Cor. viii. 4, " We know, that an idol is nothing in the
world, and that there is none other God but one." Ch. x.
19, " What say I then ? that the idol is any thing ?" Ch.
xii. 2, " Ye know, that ye were gentiles, carried away unto
these dumb idols, as ye were led."

1 Thess. i. 9, " And how ye turned to God from idols,"
meaning lifeless idols, " to serve the living and true God,"

502 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

After all this, can any Christian believe, that heathen idols
had either power or knowledge ?

Can we think, that by invocation, and consecration, aerial,
invisible beings were brought to reside in images of hollow
brass, or solid marble ? And that they thence delivered an
swers to such as sought to them? Suchh was, indeed, the
persuasion of heathen people: but it was a mere delusion
appertaining to their superstition ; for which they were
derided by the primitive Christians, and the ancient1 apo
logists ; who are justified by the scriptures, as we have
lately seen.

Can we imagine, that heathen deities were able to do
great things for those who sought to them, and recompense
them for all their costly oblations and sacrifices ? I say, can
any Christians admit such an imagination, when the pro
phets represent them as things of nought, senseless idols,
who could not see, hear, speak, or walk, as graven or molten
images, as mere stocks, that could do neither good nor evil ?
Do we not all know, how the prophet Elijah exposed the
inability of Baal, in the presence of his numerous priests
and worshippers? And shall any Christians still suppose,
that Baal was a being of mighty power ? No, no, Saturn, or
Baal, or Bel us, or by whatever other name he was invoked,
to whom so many fine children were offered in sacrifice, by
that warlike people the Carthaginians, and their ancestors k
the Phosnicians, was so far from holding the balance of

h Sed erras, inquitis, et laberis. Nam neque nos sera neque auri argentique
materias neque alias quibus signa confiunt, eas esse per se decs, et religiosa
decernimus numina : sed eos in his colimus, eosque veneramur, quos dedicatio
infert sacra, et fabrilibus efficit inhabitare simulacris. Arnob. 1. vi. p. 203. in.
Vid. ib. p. 207. in. ETrctra Se /cat OAv/iTrioc nc EV 0i\o(ro08

c^jjjuari GVVWV O.VTOIQ, Kai irtiOuiv xprjvai pr) ajueXfiv ra>v Trarpiiov — icaOacpsjue-
Vbjv de. T(»)v %oavtiiv, aOvjJi&vraQ opwv, ffvvtf3a\tvet firf tKi^aaQai rrjg Sp^ff/ctiaf,
v\r)v (f)QapTr]v KO.I ivdaXpara \tywv eivcu TO. ayaX/zara, KCLI Sia TBTO a<f)a.vi(Tfiov
VTTOHIVUV' dvvapeiG df. nvaq tvoucrjaai avroig, KCII tig epavov aTTOTrrqvat. So-
zom. H. E. 1. vii. p. 724. C. Vid. et Clementin. Horn. X. sect. xxi.

1 Simulacra ista, quae vos terrent, quaeque in templis omnibus prostrati,
atque humiles adoratis, ossa, lapides, aera sunt, argentum, aurum, lignum
sumptum ex arbore, aut commixtum glutinum gypso, &c. O utinam liceret
in simulacri alicujus medias introire pendigines ! Immo utinam liceret Olym-
piacos iltos et Capitolinos Joves in membra resolutos, omnesque illas partes,
quibus summa concluditur corporum, discretas et singulas intueri, &c. Arnob.
1. vi. p. 200, 201. et seqq.

Quisquamne igitur tarn ineptus est, ut putet aliquid esse in simulacro Dei, in
quo ne hominis quidem quicquam est prseter umbram ? — Adomnt ergo insen-
sibilia, qui sentiunt : irrationabilia, qui sapiunt : exanima, qui vivunt : terrena,
qui oriuntur ecoelo. Lact. 1. ii. cap. 2. p. 147.

k Kpovy fjiev yap QOIVIKSQ jcaO' l/ca<rov ITOQ tOvov TO. ayaTTTjra icai /iovoycvjj
rwv reKva>v. Euseb. de Laudib. Constant, p. 646. A. Vid. Hieron. Columna
ad Fragmenta Ennii. p. 74 — 76.

Of ike Dcemoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 503

power in that, or any other part of the world, or being1 able
to give victory to what people he pleased, that he was not
able to raise or lay a storm, could not form or blast one
spire of grass, or flower of the field, but was1 a dead man,
and, as to power or influence, mere nothing.

When we speak of heathen deities as dead men, we are
countenanced by many wise menm among the ancients, and
by the scriptures, as was shown n before.

And do we think, that ° their fond and sorrowful survivors
could by any methods and solemnities of deification, per
formed on this earth, seat them in heaven, and advance
them to extensive power and empire ?

Some learned men among Christians have supposed, that
the young woman at Philippi, whose case we have had un
der our consideration, who is said to have had a " spirit of
divination," had extraordinary knowledge. They say, that
' she prophesied, that she could discover lost goods, and
' reveal what happened in distant places, and do many other
' things of a like nature.' But their opinion is confuted by
the text in Isa. viii. 19, before quoted. For she was one of
those who are particularly mentioned by the prophet, as
having a familiar spirit, or spirit of Python, and muttering,
that is, speaking as out of the belly or breast. And so the
place was understood of old by p Jerom.

3. Obj. The third objection to be considered by us is,
that the evangelists seem to have believed real possessions,

1 Saturnum enim principem hujus generis et examinis omnes scriptores
vetustatis, Graeci Romanique, hominem prodiderunt. Minuc. Fel. cap. 22.

m Quibus ex rebus cum constet illos homines fuisse, non est obscurum, qua
ratione dii cceperint nominari. Hac scilicet ratione Romani Caesares suos
consecraverunt, et Mauri reges suos. Lactant. 1. i. cap. 15.

— — et ideo simulacra constituunt. Quae quia mortuorum sunt imagines,
similia mortuis sunt. Omni enim sensu carent. Id. 1. ii. cap. 2. p. 146.

Si vero scrutari vetera, et ex his ea, quae scriptores Graeciae prodiderunt,
eruere coner j ipsi illi majorum gentium dii qui habentur, hinc a nobis profecti
in ccelum reperientur. Cic. Tuscul. Disp. i. c. 13. Et Conf. Lact. 1. i. c.
15. p. 85.

Vid. Euseb. de Vita Constant. 1. ii. cap. 16. 1. iii. cap. 26. et 54. et passim.
Vid. Dem. Evang. 1. viii. p. 364. Clementin. Horn. 6. n. xxi. xxii. p. 669, 670.

n See here, p. 472.

0 Ignosci moerentibus potest, credentibus non potest. Quis enim tarn de-
mens, qui, consensu, et placito innumerabilium stultorum, aperiri ccelum
mortuis arbitretur; aut aliquem, quod ipse non habeat, dare alteri posse?
Lact. 1. i. cap. 15. p. 86.

p Si dixerint, in quit, patres vestri, quos reliquistis : Quaerite ventriloquos,
quos Pythonas intelligimus. Qualem et in Actibus Apostolorum ancillam
legimus, quae queestui erat dominis suis. Hieron. Comm. in Is. cap. viii.
Tom. 3. p, 81.

504 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

and to have thought, that divers of the afflicted persons,
whose cures they relate, had evil spirits.

To which I answer, that I think this cannot be denied,
and that it needs not to be contested. Nor ought this to be
thought strange, even supposing that there was no agency
or interposition of evil spirits : for the opinion of posses
sions being common at that time, and generally admitted
by the knowing, as well as by the others, it is no wonder
that the evangelists should be of the same sentiment. The
twelve apostles of Christ were unlearned men ; our Lord
chose to have such for apostles; and he did not teach them
philosophy, but religion. And indeed, if the evangelists
had appeared to know more than others, in this and other
points of a philosophical nature, it might have diminished
the credibility of their history. If they had been wiser and
rnore knowing than most others, and even than the knowing
and learned of that time ; some would have been apt to
charge them with art and contrivance in the main parts of
their history. But now there is no room for such a charge
or suspicion.

4. Obj. The fourth and last objection is, that our blessed
Lord, if he did not countenance the common and prevailing
opinion upon this head, does not appear to have opposed or
discouraged it; which we may think he would have done
if it was not right. For it might have been an useful work,
and a benefit to mankind, to deliver them from wrong ap
prehensions upon this point.

To which I answer: undoubtedly our blessed Lord knew
the truth of the case, for he knew all things. But it does
not follow, that he was therefore obliged to speak his mind,
or to correct every false and mistaken notion among the
people whom he taught. Ourq Lord was concerned in the
most important design, teaching the principles of true reli
gion, and recommending them by works of mighty power
and great goodness. When any afflicted cases were brought
to him, it was sufficient to heal them, to whatever cause
they were ascribed. It was expedient not to enter into any
debate upon that head : it might have diverted him from his
main work.

i D'ailleurs, N. S. n' etoit pas appelle a corriger les fausses idees que les
Juifs pouvoient avoir sur la nature de ces maladies. Et s'll leur avoit dit,
qu'elles etoient 1'effet de quelques causes naturelles, ils en auroient pris ira
pretexte de 1'accuser de nier qu'il y cut de mauvais esprits j et par consequent
qu'il y en eut aussi de bons. Les pharisiens en auroient fait un sadduceen,
Beaus. Remarques sur le N. T. p. 14.

Of the Dcemoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 505

We do not observe in the Old Testament, that it was cus
tomary for any prophet to instruct men in the things of
nature. The people of the Jews, in the time of our Saviour,
were generally free from idolatry : and as they considered
the spirits, which they supposed sometimes to inflict distem
pers on men, to be " evil and unclean," there was no danger
of their honouring and worshipping them. There was
therefore no urgent necessity, that he should interpose for
correcting any misapprehensions concerning the causes of
some indispositions and distempers.

That our Lord studiously declined to concern himself
with things foreign to the office of a prophet, or extraor
dinary messenger from heaven, may appear from two par
ticular instances.

One is at the beginning of the ninth chapter of St. John's
gospel. "And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which
was blind from his birth. And his disciples asked him,
saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that
he was born blind? Jesus answered, Neither hath this man
sinned, nor his parents, but that the works of God should
be made manifest in him." Here the disciples give the
Lord a fair occasion to say something about the philosophi
cal notion of the pre-existence of the human soul : but our
Lord declines that point, and only says that the blindness
of this man was not owing to any sin of his own, or his
parents.

The other instance is in Luke xii. 13, 14: " And one of
the company said unto him, Master, speak to my brother,
that he divide the inheritance with me. And he said unto
him, Man, who made me a judge and a divider over you ?
Arid he said unto them, Take heed, and beware of covetous-
ness," and what follows. Here one comes to our Lord with
a petition ; and it may be thought to be very reasonable :
for it cannot but be a good work to decide a cause truly,
and with a just sentence, and to reconcile brethren. Ne
vertheless our Lord absolutely rejects the proposal, as im
proper to be hearkened to by him. His work was to teach
religion, to mortify earthly affections, to deliver men from
covetousness, and to raise men's thoughts to things above.
For such ends as these, he embraced the present, and all
other occasions. But to interpose in particular differences
among men, was not his province.

I take this to be a sufficient answer to the difficulty
under consideration.

But then here ariseth an objection against all that has
been said in this, and the two preceding discourses. For

506 Supplement to the First Part of tJie Credibility.

it may be said, if Christ confined his doctrine to the import
ant truths and duties of religion, should not a preacher of
the gospel do the same, and decline every thing not expressly
taught by Christ or his apostles ?

To which I answer, that in the course of this argument I
have intimated over and over, that no particular sentiment
concerning this point ought to be reckoned an article of
religion. It is left undetermined by Christ and his apostles;
and men may think of it as they find best, if they do but
take care to maintain the supremacy of the divine govern
ment, and guard against undue fears and apprehensions of
evil spirits. And having inculcated such observations and
cautions as these, I hope no harm has been done in setting
before you the different sentiments of learned, and judicious,
and pious interpreters of scripture, concerning the case of
those, who in the New Testament are spoken of as having
evil spirits.

And having now finished the argument, I again declare,
(what no one can doubt the truth of,) that it is more satis
factory to promote good works among men, than to bring
them over to any particular opinion. There is more pleasure
in advancing the happiness of others, than in raising a man's
own reputation for skill in any branch of science. Humility
is better than knowledge : a right disposition of heart is
more valuable than right sentiments. At the same time it
is a reasonable ambition, to promote both knowledge and
piety : the character of Christians then becomes complete.
A love of truth, a thirst after knowledge, an inquisitive
temper, seem to be inseparable concomitants of integrity.
Such dispositions therefore may be fitly cherished and
encouraged.

Solomon says, that "wisdom excelleth folly, as far as
light excelleth darkness," Eccl. ii. 13. " That the soul be
without knowledge, it is not good," Prov. xix. 2. «' The
heart of the prudent getteth knowledge, and the ear of the
wise seeketh knowledge, xviii. 15. I therefore take the
liberty to conclude with that exhortation to you, which St.
Paul gave to the Christians at Corinth, " Brethren, be not
children in understanding : howbeit, in malice be ye chil
dren, but in understanding be men," 1 Cor. xiv. 20.

Of the Demoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 507

AN APPENDIX.

FOR FURTHER ILLUSTRATING THE SUBJECT.

I. Tivo passages of Josephus concerning Dcemoniacs, with
Remarks. II. Divers texts of the New Testament, re
lating to Dcemoniacs , explained, 1. Matt. xii. 27, 28; 2.
Matt. xii. 43—45; 3. Matt. xvii. 21 ; 4. Luke x. 17, 18.
5. Texts, where Damons are said to be rebuked by our
Lord. III. A remarkable explication of Acts vi. 9.

I. JOSEPHUS, having described the castle of Machaerus,
or Machoeruns, says: * Ona the north side of the city is a
' valley, in which is a place called Baaras. It bears a plant
' of the same name. It is of a flaming colour, and toward

* evening it shines very bright. It is not easy to be taken
' by those who would gather it : for it withdraws itself,

* and does not stay, unless one pours upon it the urine of a
' woman, or menstruous blood : and even then it is certain

* death to him who takes it, unless he carries the root hang-

* ing down upon the hand. There is another way of get-

* ting this plant without danger. It is this. They dig all

* round it, so that a very small bit only of the root is left in
' the ground ; then they tie a dog to it, and he attempting
' to follow him that tied it, the root is easily pulled up : but
4 the dog dies presently, as it were in the stead of him who
' would get the plant : afterwards there is no danger to
' those who touch it. With all these dangers the root is
' very desirable, for the sake of one virtue. For daemons b
' as they are called, who are the spirits of wicked men, en-
' tering into the living, and killing those who have no help,
' this root presently expels, if it be only brought near to

* those who are diseased.'

It is astonishing, that any man in repute for good sense,
should be able to write in this manner. Surely there never
was in any part of the world a plant with all these proper
ties.

That passage is taken from the History of the Jewish War.

a De B. Jud. 1. vii. cap. 25. [al. vi.] sect. 3.

b Ta yap (caXs/iera Saipovia' Tavra Be Trovrjpuv vziv avOpuiruv nvevfjiaTa,
, feat KTUVOVTO, TSQ (3or)0eia£ /Jirj Tvy^avovraQ'
povov TOIQ vooaai. Ibid.

508 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

There is another passage in his Jewish Antiquities, in the
history of Solomon.

In the former part of the paragraph is the substance of
what is said of Solomon's great wisdom, in 1 Kings iv. 29
— 34, After which it follows: * Godc also gave him un-
4 derstanding to attain to skill against daemons for the bene-
' fit of mankind. For having composed incantations,

* whereby diseases are removed, he also left behind him
' certain kinds of exorcisms, whereby daemons may be ex--

* pelled, so as never to return again. And this method of
4 cure is effectual [or prevails much] among us to this day.

* For I saw one Eleazar, my countryman, in the presence
4 of Vespasian, and his sons, and many tribunes, and other

* soldiers, deliver men who were seized by these daemons.
4 The cure was in this manner. Applying* to the nostrils
4 of the daemoniacs a ring, having under the seal one of
4 those roots, of which Solomon taught the virtues, he drew
4 out the daemon at the nostrils of the man who srnelled to

* it. The man presently falling down, he mentioned < Solo-
4 mon,' and reciting the charms composed by him, he ad-
'jured the daemon never to return any more. Moreover,
4 Eleazar being desirous to satisfy all the company that he
4 had that power, he placed a little way off a cup full of
4 water, or a small vessel, in which the feet are washed.
4 Then he commanded the daemon, as he went out of the

* man, lo overthrow them, that all present might be sensible

* he had left the man. This being done, the wisdom of So-
4 1 onion was made manifest.'

We are now to make remarks upon these two passages.

1. We hence evidently perceive, that Josephus believed
there were real daemoniacs, or persons into whom daemons
entered, and to whom they were troublesome.

c Hapecrxe Se avTip paOeiv 6 Ofo£» feat rr\v Kara TUV daifiovuv Te^vjjv tig
v Kat Stpcnruav TOIQ av9p<t)7roig' tTTtpdaQ re avvra£,an£VOG, a\g Traprjyo-

ptirai TO. vo<T?7juara, /cat Tpoir&Q tZopKwatojv KareXtnrsv,

vmt cjf /ij/fcer' eiravtXOtiv, £/cdiw/c«(7t. Kat avrr] f^^XP

TTfta TrXfiTOV to^ua. 'l<ropj]cra yap Tiva E\£a£apov rwv oj

ciavs TrapovTOQ - TSQ vTco T(t)v daifiovi(i)i' Xaju/3avojU£ VSQ cnroXvovra

CO fo rrjq SrepctTTtiaQ rponoQ roisrog r\v> TIpovQepwv rate fa1 fatfiov

TOV daKTvXiov, £%ovra VTTO ry (T0pay«di pi£av (% cJv vtridiiZe 2o\ojwu>i>,

o(T0patvo//£v^> ^ta T(i>v fJLVKrr]p(i}V TO ^ai^ioviov- Kat TTZGOVTOQ tvOvg TK
fir)K£T* IIQ avrov eTTaveXOsiv topics, SoXojuwvo^ re fiefjivrjuevoc, KO.I TO.Q

ag <rvvt9r)Kev eictivoQ, fTrtXfywi'. JjsXofitvog fie TTftffat ;cat
TOIQ Traparvy^avsciv 6 EXfa£apof , on ravTt]v £%£t t^vv, eriOei [UKpov
Otv i]Toi TTOTrjpiov TrXrjptQ vdaroQ, rj TroSovnrTpov' /cat rcto Saijtov^p
t&ovTi r« av<?pw7T8 TO.VT avarpt-^at, KO.I Trapao^iiv en iyva>vai TOIQ opwaiv, on
KaraXiXoure TOV avQpwirov, K. X. Antiq. 1. viii. cap. ii. sect, 5.

Of the Damoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 509

2. Therefore this must have been a common opinion at
that time, as we perceive in the gospels.

3. The daemons, who entered into men, and took pos
session of them, according* to his account, were the spirits
or souls of wicked men. And it may be also hence con
cluded, that this was the opinion of many other Jews at
that time.

And by the way I would observe, that we have here full
proof that the pharisees, of which sect Josephus was, be
lieved the separate existence of souls after death. This was
shown d formerly from several passages in his works, where
he speaks of the souls of good and bad men, and says,

* That6 according to the doctrine of the sadducees souls

* perish with the bodies.' But he and the rest of the phari
sees believed the continuance or subsistence of souls after
death. I think we are hereby led to the true and certain
interpretation of Acts xxiii. 8, " For f the sadducees say,
that there is no resurrection, neither angel nor spirit : but
the pharisees confess both." Where by * spirit ' must be
meant the human soul, subsisting separate from the body.

4. We farther learn from Josephus, that incantations and
exorcisms were practised by Jews in his time, for expelling
daemons out of the bodies of men, of which they were sup
posed to have taken possession.

5. The story told by Joseph us of Eleazar lies open to
many exceptions, and appears ridiculous. For what reason
can there be to think, that daemons, whether they be bad
angels, or the souls of bad men, should be affected by the
smell of a root? It is likely, that Eleazar was an impostor,
and the whole affair related by Josephus, as transacted be
fore Vespasian and his court, was artifice and delusion.
There was a compact between Eleazar and the pretended
daemoniac. Josephus has not mentioned the symptoms of
any distemper under which the man laboured. If the man
had been afflicted with some grievous disorder, the removal
of it would have been sufficient proof of the power of
Eleazar, and of the virtues of Solomon's incantations, with
out overturning a small vessel of water, placed near the ex
orcist or his daemoniac. How that was done I do not know;
but I suppose our slight-of-hand gentlemen can easily ac-

d See p. 125 — 127. c ZaSSaicaioic Se TO.Q

rote <ra>/uacrt. Ant. lib. xviii. cap. 1. sect. 4.

f Deum esse credebant, sed praeter eum nihil quod non sensibus perciperetur,
non angelos v^aaQai, non superesse corporibus animos, ideoque nee fore
«i>a<r«(rti>. Grot, in Act. xxiii. 8. Vid. et Wolf, in eundera locum.

510 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

count for such a feat, and gratify spectators with others more
surprising.

6. It may be hence argued, that the Jewish exorcists, with
all their incantations, were of very little service to mankind,
for relieving them under any indisposition. How ineffectual
the exorcisms of the sons of Sceva, a Jewish priest, were at
Ephesus, we have seen in the history related in Acts xix.
13 — 17. Nor does it appear that Eleazar, of whom Jose-
phus writes, performed any cure, or expelled any daemon ;
but it was mere artifice, as just shown.

7. From these two passages we may be fully satisfied, that
Josephus was not a Christian. And it may be also argued
with great probability, that the passage concerning Jesus,
in the xviiith book of his Antiquities, is not genuine, but is
an interpolation.

8. Must it not appear very remarkable, that Josephus,
shunning the affairs of Christians, and omitting the great
works of our Lord and his apostles, has not been able to
relate one credible story of a miracle, excepting those of the
Old Testament ? Josephus is willing enough to relate mira
cles and extraordinary things, or such things as have an
appearance of being so. But they will not bear examination.
How came this to pass, that Josephus, a pharisee, a learned
man, of the race of the priests, should fall so far below our
honest artless evangelists? In their histories we see simpli
city and dignity. The reason is, because they are truth :
they copy a real original. They write the history of the
great prophet that was to come, the Messiah ; who cures
diseases of all kinds, and raises the dead with his word,
without parade and ostentation. But the learned Josephus,
the priest, the statesman ; Josephus, when he attempts to
relate a miracle for the honour of his country, even the dis
possessing a daemon, produceth nothing extraordinary, but
the overturning a small tottering vessel full of water, and
says, that the daemon came out at the man's nose !

And can any man who reads the above-cited passages,
think it any disparagement to the Christian religion, that it
was not embraced by Josephus, who has given such proofs
of want of judgment, and had no just notions in things of
religion ? For he could not conceive, that % intentions, with
out the act, were liable to punishment.

II. 1. Matt. xii. 27, " And if I by Beelzebub cast out
daemons, by whom do your children cast them out? There
fore they shall be your judges." 28, " But if I cast out

g To yap jujj/cm Troijjffai TO tpyov (3a\evaapevov, sk t*t rt/uwpiag a%iov.
Antiq. 1. xii. cap. 9. sect. 1.

Of the Demoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 511

daemons by the spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is
come unto you." Comp. Luke xi. 19, 20.

Joseph us has assured us, that the Jews practised exor
cisms for expelling daemons ; and has informed us of one
method of performing them. Divers ancient Christian
writers, Justin Martyr, Irenseus, Tertullian, Origen, and
others, (whose passages may be seen in Grotius and Whit-
by upon this text of St. Matthew,) do also speak of Jewish
exorcisms; and suppose, that they adjured daemons in the
name of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. To these h
exorcists, it is likely, our Lord refers ; and not to his
own disciples, or any others who had a respect for him,
like the person mentioned, Mark ix. 38 — 40, and Luke
ix. 49, 50.

What our Lord says is to this effect : ' If I, as you say,

* by Beelzebub cast out daemons, by whom do your country-

* men and disciples cast them out, or attempt to do so ? You
' do not impute to them a combination with Satan ; but you

* approve of them. From their practices therefore, mean
' and contemptible as they are, may be formed an argument
' sufficient to show the injustice and the malignity of your

* censure passed upon me. For if 1 cast out daemons, and
' by a word instantly cure all manner of diseases usually
' ascribed to those evil spirits, and all their worst symptoms,

* as you see me to do daily : you cannot but know, it is

* owing to an immediate exertion of the power of God ; and

* you might conclude, that his kingdom by the Messiah is
' now setting up among you.'

Our Lord does not here ascribe any virtue to the Jewish
exorcisms, he rather supposes them ineffectual and insigni
ficant ; and tells the pharisees, they could not but know,
that the great works done by him were full proof of his au
thority and mission, and of the most extraordinary divine
manifestation among them.

2. Our Lord, reproving the hypocrisy of the pharisees, and
the prevailing unbelief of the Jewish people, and apprising
them of the imminent danger they were in of falling under
the heavy judgments of God, says : " When the unclean
spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places
seeking rest, and findeth none. Then he saith, I will return
unto my house whence I came out ; and when he is come,
he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished. Then goeth he,
and taketh with him seven other spirits more wicked than

h ' Filii vestri.' Non apostoli, qui a pharisaeis una cum Christo accusa-
bantur, sed populares pharisaeorum, et discipuli. Grot, ad Matt. xii. 27. See
also Whitby upon the place.

512 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

himself, and they enter in and dwell there : and the last
state of that man is worse than the first. Even so shall it
be also unto this wicked generation," Matt. xii. 43 — 45.
The same is recorded also, Luke xi. 24 — 26.

This discourse of our Lord is a comparison, wherein he
represents the state of the Jewish people, by way of allusion
to those distempers which they ascribed to evil spirits.

" When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he
walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and findeth none."
The Jewish people, in the latter times of their commonwealth,
had a notion that daemons did often frequent desert places.
In Isa. xiii. 21, representing the desolation of Babylon, it is
said : " Wild beasts of the desert shall lie there, and their
houses shall be full of doleful creatures, and owls shall
dwell there, and satyrs shall dance there." Instead of

* satyrs,' which is our translation, the Greek version of the
Seventy puts daemons, Kat Saipove? eicei op^ffov-rai. The same
language is adopted in the description of the ruin of the
antichristian Babylon, in Rev. xviii. 2; " Babylon the great
is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of daemons,
and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every un
clean and hateful bird, Ka-ronc^T^pLov Sai/movt^v."

In our Lord's comparison which we are considering, it is
supposed, that evil spirits might leave a man for a while, and
afterwards return. This also must have been a very com
mon opinion of the Jews. Therefore Josephus observes in
the history before transcribed, of Eleazar's dispossessing a
daemon, ' that reciting the charms composed by Solomon,

* he adjured the daemon never to return any more.' This
opinion, as may be well supposed, was the reason why the
daemoniac, in the country of the Gadarenes, entreated our
Lord to permit him to accompany him ; thinking, it is
likely, that to be the only security against the return of the
evil spirits, with which he had been vexed, as he imagined.
" When he was entered into the ship, he that had been pos
sessed with the daemon, prayed him that he might be with
him. Howbeit Jesus suffered him not," Mark v. 18, 19;
Comp. Luke viii. 38. And our Lord also in his great good
ness, to prevent troublesome fears and disquieting appre
hensions, when he cured the young man of the epilepsy,
which had been ascribed to an evil spirit, as the evangelist
assures us, " rebuked the foul spirit, saying unto him, Thou
dumb and deaf spirit, I charge thee come out of him, and
enter no more into him," Mark ix. 25.

Once more, it is supposed in this comparison, that if a
daemon returned to a man, and took possession of him again

Of the Demoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 513

after having left him for a while, the state of that man would
be very unhappy. And it is very reasonable to think, that
if a person had been relieved under any distemper which
was ascribed to evil spirits, and he was again seized with it,
the symptoms would be more violent, and the man's case be
very deplorable, and even desperate.

The Jewish people had been severely chastised by the
Babylonish captivity, and a partial reformation had been
obtained. They now enjoyed much peace in their own land,
and they had the liberty of worship at the temple. They
had lately been under the searching ministry of John the
Baptist, calling them to repentance, and telling them, that
" the axe was laid to the root of the tree. He was a burn
ing and a shining light : and for a season they rejoiced in his
light." They now enjoyed the excellent instructions of
Jesus, who also wrought among them works which no pro
phet had done before, fully proving his high commission.
And " many heard him gladly." They said, " never man
spake like him: John did no miracles : but all things that
John spake of this man were true : many believed on him, and
said, When the Messiah comes will he do more miracles
than these, which this man has done?" If, after all, this
people should generally admit, and indulge within them
selves, the worst passions, and should be guilty of the worst
crimes, and grow more and more hardened in wickedness,
they would bring down upon themselves, by the righteous
judgment of God, heavier calamities than ever had befallen
them in former times.

That is what our Lord declares in the figurative ex
pressions of this comparison. Every one will be led to
recollect here what St. Peter says, 1 ep. ii. 20 — 22. And I
refer to the commentators, especially Grotius, upon the place
which we have been now considering.

3. Matt. xvii. 21, " Howbeit this kind goeth not out by
prayer and fasting." Mark ix. 29, " And he said unto them,
This kind can come forth by nothing but by prayer and fast
ing."

The occasion of these words is well known. Whilst our
Saviour was in the mount with three of his disciples, Peter,
and James, and John, the sons of Zebedee ; a man brought
to the rest of the disciples his son, who was " lunatic and sore
vexed," with an epileptic disorder ascribed to an evil spirit ;
but they could not cure him. When the father told this to
our Lord, he reproved their want of faith : See Matt. xvii.
16, 17 ; Mark ix. 18, 19 ; Luke ix. 40, 41. When the
young man had been healed, and the company was with-

VOL. i. 2 L

514 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

drawn, " the disciples came to Jesus apart, and said, Why
could not we cast him out ? And Jesus said unto them,
because of your unbelief. For verily I say unto you, If ye
have faith as a grain of mustard-seed, ye shall say unto this
mountain, Remove hence to yonder place, and it shall re
move ; and nothing shall be impossible unto you. How-
beit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting," Matt,
xvii. 19—21.

A faith of miracles may be defined after this1 manner. * It
' was a firm and well-grounded persuasion of mind, enabling
' men to set about a miraculous operation, in full assurance
' of God's assisting them.* Our Lord told his disciples,
thatk their not being able to cure this young man was owing
to the defect of faith, and he reproves them for it. At the
same time he teaches them how they might obtain an increase
of faith, so as to be able to perform the greatest miracles.
The method prescribed by him for that end is humble and
fervent prayer, and mortification to this world ; a temper
mightily suited to the sublime and heavenly doctrine of the
gospel, and very necessary in the preachers of it in all times,
especially at its first publication.

The defect of faith was blamable in the disciples : for our
Lord had " given them power against unclean spirits, to
oast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness, and all
manner of disease," Matt. x. 1. And unquestionably they
had before now wrought many miracles : this they must
have done, when sent forth by Jesus during the time of his
abode on this earth. St. Mark says, ch. vi. 12, 13, " And
they went out and preached that men should repent. And
they cast out many daemons, and anointed with oil many
that were sick, and healed them." Our Lord gave like
powers afterwards to seventy other disciples. Luke x.
beginning, " And they returned again with joy, saying,
Lord, even the daemons are subject to us through thy name."

But though the disciples had performed some miracles,
their faith was not sufficient for the cure of this young man,
whose distemper was obstinate and inveterate, and the
symptoms very violent.

This history may be illustrated by another instance of
defect of faith in the disciples. When they met with a great

' Compare Dr. Benson's Reasonableness of the Christian Religion, p. 6, 7.

k Supra dixerat Christus, fiducia opus esse ad haec praesertim notae majoris
miracula. Nunc ostendit, quomodo ea parari possit, precibus nimirum fer-
vidis. Jejunium ideo adjungit, quia ad preces inprimis requiritur animus de-
missus ; cui rei inservit jejunium. Unde plerumque conjungi videmus vrj^etav
et Setjaiv sive irpoatvxriv, Luc. ii. 37 ; Act. x. 30, &c. Grot, ad Matt,
xvii. 21.

Of the Demoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 515

storm, as they were crossing over the sea of Galilee with
our Lord in the ship, they were exceedingly affrighted, and
came to him, saying, " Lord, save us, we perish," Matt. viii.
24—26; Mark iv. 37—39; Luke viii. 22—25. Says an
ingenious1 writer, ' According to the harmony of the four
' gospels, there are above twenty places were Jesus is said

* to have worked miracles before this. And therefore the
' disciples, who had been eye-witnesses of most of those
' miracles, had just reason to think, that he was able to
' deliver them in the greatest danger : and that they, espe-

* cially in his presence, were under the peculiar inspection

and care of God.' Consequently, our Lord j ustly reproved
them at that season, saying, " Why are ye tearful, O ye of
little faith?"

The greatness of the danger which they were then in, too
much alarmed their fears ; and the violence of the symptoms
of the youngman's distemper too much discouraged them: for
which they were justly reproved. Nevertheless, our blessed
Lord, ever mild and compassionate, makes allowance for
their prejudices and want of consideration ; and encourageth
them to hope, that they should obtain an increase of faith,
and be able to discharge the service to which he had ap
pointed them in an honourable manner.

We may here fitly recollect a prayer of the apostles, and
the answer vouchsafed. Acts iv. 24 — 31, " And now, Lord,
behold their threatenings. And grant unto thy servants,
that with all boldness they may speak thy word : and that
signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy
child [rather son or servant] Jesus. And when they had
prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled
together. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and
they spake the word with boldness." That is, there was a
fresh effusion upon them of knowledge, power, and comfort :
whereby they were assured of their being enabled to do
every thing needful to confirm the truth of Christ's resur
rection. Accordingly it is said there at ver. 33, "And with
great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of
the Lord Jesus."

4. Luke x. 17, 18, " And the seventy returned with joy,
saying, Lord, even the daemons are subject to us through
thy name. And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as light
ning fall from heaven."

Those words cannot be taken literally ; for by * heaven '
understand the supreme heaven, the place of the blessed :
and it is allowed by all, that Satan, with his angels, was

1 Dr. Benson's Reasonableness of the Christian Religion, p. 209, 210.

516 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

long" before driven thence, and could have no access there.
Nor can it be hereby intended, that Christ saw Satan fall
like lightning from the upper region of the air : for that is
a thing of no moment. The words therefore figuratively
represent the speedy overthrow of error, falsehood, idolatry,
and sin, by the preaching of the gospel, accompanied with
mighty signs and wonders, done by the apostles, and others,
in the name of Jesus Christ.

5. Our blessed Lord is sometimes said in the gospels to
have rebuked daemons. Those places shall be here taken
notice of.

Mark i. 23 — 26, " And there was in their synagogue [at
Capernaum] a man with an unclean spirit. And he cried
out, saying, Let us alone. What have we to do with thee,
thou Jesus of Nazareth ? Art thou come to destroy us ? I
know thee, who thou art, the holy one of God. And Jesus
rebuked him, saying, Hold thy peace, and come out of him."
The same miracle is related, and in the same manner, by
St. Luke, ch. iv. 33—35.

In the history of the cure of the young man who had the
epilepsy, which was ascribed to the influence of an evil
spirit, it is said : " And Jesus rebuked the daBinon, and he
departed out of him ; and the child was cured from that
hour," Matt. xvii. 18. " When Jesus saw that the people
came running together, he rebuked the foul spirit, saying
unto him, Thou dumb and deaf spirit, I charge thee come
out of him, and enter no more into him," Mark ix. 25. " And
Jesus rebuked the unclean spirit, and healed the child, and
delivered him again to his father," Luke ix. 42.

It should be observed, that the word ' rebuke ' is also
used concerning things, to which we do not ascribe
either life or intelligence. " Then he arose, and rebuked
the winds and the sea, and there was a great calm," Matt,
viii. 26. " And he arose, and rebuked the wind, and said,
Peace, be still. And the winds ceased, and there was a
great calm," Mark iv. 39. " Then he arose and rebuked
the wind, and the raging of the water; and they ceased, and
there was a calm," Luke viii. 24.

Luke iv. 39, " And he stood over her, and rebuked the
fever, and it left her."

The truth of the case, as before said, I take to be this.
Our Lord, in curing distempers generally ascribed to evil
spirits, sometimes accommodated his expressions and man
ner of treating such afflicted persons, to the common opinion
of the people, without countenancing or approving it.

III. The Acts vi. 9, " Then there arose certain of the

Of the Demoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 517

synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines,
and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia,
and of Asia, disputing with Stephen."

In the first part of the Credibility of the Gospel His
tory,"1 I endeavoured to show who they were who are called
Libertines. Since that time I have met with another inter
pretation, which I am now desirous to propose to my read
ers, and to render it more common than it seems to be. It
does not immediately relate to the subject of which we have
been treating here : nevertheless, I presume none will be
much offended at my inserting- the observation in this place.

It is in the Academical Exercitations" of Mr. Daniel
Gerdes, Professor of Divinity in the University of Groningen.
He is of opinion, that0 these Libertines are so called from a

m Seep. 118, 119. n Danielis Gerdesii Exercitationum

Academicarum libri tres. Qto. Amst. 1738.

0 Nationis autem atque regionis, non status sive conditionis, Ai/3fprtvwv
nomen esse, cum maxime nobis sit probabile, et Libertines dictos Judaeos, a
Liberto, Africa? Propriae, sive Carthaginensis, quae et Proconsularis dicebatur,
sive oppido, sive regione, quam habitabant, tametsi ad instar caeterorum, vel
Cyrenen vicinam, vel Alexandriam inhabitantium, Hierosolymis suam habe-
rent synagogam, a proprio suo nomine, aeque ac Alexandrinorum ac Cyrenen-
sium appellatam — Et quidem quod ad rationes, nemo non videt, nihil planius
nihilque simplicius esse hac hypothesi, quae veram vocabulorum retinet no-
tionein — Accedit in genere, quod cum Libertini jungantur Cyrenensibus, Alex-
andrinis, Cilicibus, et Asianis, et hi tamen omnes a locis babitationis suae ap-
pellentur, credibile quoque non sit, Libertinos non a loco vel habitation is sede,
sed a conditione, ju£ra/3a<ra tig a\\o ytvoc, prorsus insolita, denominates esse :
imprimis si in specie consideremus, quod Libertinis statim jungantur Cyrenen-
ses et Alexandrini, quibus nominibus itidem Africae incolae designantur, et
sive Judaei sive proselyti ex ill is regiombus oriundi indicabantur. — Suidas
tamen in Lexicosuo, Tom. ii. fol. 445. edit. Kuster, vocem nostram ad gentem
ita nominatam applicari debere manifesto indicat. AifStpTivoQ ovopa iQvsQ.
Libertini, nomen gentis. Glossa quoque Interlinearis, cui suas cum primis
notas superstruxit Nicolaiis de Lyra, voci Libertinorum superscripsit a regione.
Unde ipse Lyra: Libertinorum, inquit, a regione sic nominatorum, ut dicit
Glossa Interlinearis. Sed ubinam ea sita est regio ? Duo sunt in Actis pub-
licis ecclesiasticis nobis relicta monumenta, ex quibus de Libertinis vel Liber-
tinensibus, eorumque situ, judicare tuto possumus. — Alterum monumentum
habemus in Gestis celeberrimae illius A. 411. habitae cum Donatistis Colla-
tionis Carthaginensis. Quod cum conservatum sit a consiliorum collectonbus
— atque cum ipsis Actis subjunctum editioni praestantissimae Optati Milevitani
adversus Donatistas, quam procuravit Elias Du Pinius. Legitur in Actis Col-
lationis ita : ' Item recitavit. Victor Episcopus ecclesiae catholicae Libertinensis.'
Cel. Baluzii nota ad vocabulum Libertinensis haec est 1. c. Libertinensis. In
provincia Proconsulari. Atque ita sua sponte ducimur ad alterum illud quod
dicebamus monumentum, ex Actis Concilii Lateranensis, A. 649. habiti, de-
promptum, ubi habetur Epistola — Episcoporum sancti Concilii, Proconsularis
ad Paulum Constantinopolitanum, subscripta ab ipsis Episcopis, inter quos
quoque occurrit, ' Januarius gratia Dei episcopus sanctae Ecclesiae Liberti-

' nensis.' Cum ea propter etiam Cl. Fabricius suo Episcopatuum orbis

Christiani Indici Geographico, quern subjecit libro, cui tit. * Salutaris Lux

518 Supplement to the First Part of the Credibility.

city or country, named Libertus, or Libertina, situated in
Africa. This appears to be very probable, because all the
other people here mentioned are denominated from the
places inhabited by them. Suidas in his Lexicon, at the
word At/3e/9Tti/os, says, it was the name of a people, though
he does not mention the country in which they dwelt. The
Glossa Interlinearis, of which Nicolas de Lyra made great
use, intimates upon this text, that the Libertines were so
called from a country. In the Acts of the famous Con
ference with the Donatists at Carthage in the year 411, is
the name of a bishop of the church of Libertina: which is
supposed to have been situate in Africa Propria, or the pro
consular province in Africa. Another bishop of the same
place, Libertina, is mentioned in the Acts of the Lateran
council held in 619. Accordingly Fabricius, in his Geo
graphical Index of Christian Bishoprics, has placed
Libertina as being in the proconsular Africa. And long
before, Abraham Ortelius, in his Thesaurus Geographicus,
at the word Libertini, observes, that St. Luke, in the sixth
chapter of the Acts had spoken of the Libertines as a
people. Moreover (Ecurnenius, in his Commentary upon
the Acts, has mentioned this as one interpretation; that**
the Libertines, as well as the Cyrenians, were a people
living beyond Alexandria, who had a synagogue at Jeru
salem.

All these particulars are insisted on by Mr. Gerdes in his
argument upon the subject. I have transcribed a large part
below in his own words.

The learned and judicious compilers of the Bibliotheque
Raisonnee, at the conclusion of their account of this dispu
tation of Mr. Gerdes, addi a reference to Pool's Synopsis.
I shall place below1" the passage to which they refer.
Whence it may appear, that this interpretation has not been
unknown to learned men : but it has not been so much at-

' Evangelii,' &c. Libertinensem episcopatum in Africa Proconsulari inse-
ruerit : Cum Abrahamus Ortelius non minus jam antehac in Thesauro Geogra-
phico quoque annotaverit, * Libertinorum tanquam gentis meminisse Divum

* Lucam Actor, vi. atque gentis nomen esse apud Suidam, Libertinensis autem

* ecclesiae in Africa episcopurn habere Collationem Africanam.' Dan. Gerdes,
Disputatio de Synagoga Libertinorum, num. xxvii. — xxix. p. 509 — 513.

p A\Xw£. AiptpTiviov Kai Kvprjvauav ruv nrtictiva AXegavflpeiaf - wv
Kai $ta0opoi cwaywyai tv 'Iepsaa\r]fJL Kara iQvrj evavXi^ofneviov- Ato icai avva-

ti\w TOTTXQ a0a>pi<r/z£j/8£ BTT' avayvwffti TWV Maxrewt; voftwv, CEcum.
in Act. T. 1. p. 57.

i Biblioth. Raisonnee, Tom. 24. Part. i. p. 67. Amst. 1740.

r Quinam hi ? Resp. 2. Apud Suidam est. Aifitprivoi, ovopa tQvsg,
nomen gentis. Idem scribit Ortelius. Quin et ecclesia Libertinensis in
Africa habetur in Collatione Carthaginensi. Pol. Syn. ad Act. vi. 9.

Of the Dcemoniacs mentioned in the New Testament. 519

tended to as I think it deserves. And Mr. Gerdes has cast
a great deal of new light upon it, and much confirmed it.

Upon the whole, it appears to be very probable, that the
Libertines were native Jews,,and proselytes, living* at Liber-
tus or Libertina, who had a synagogue at Jerusalem. And
the order of the names in St. Luke might lead us to think,
that they were farther off from Jerusalem than Alexandria
and Cyrene: which confirms the supposition, that the place
whence they were named, was situated in what was called
Africa Propria, or the proconsular province.

END OF THK FIRST VOLUME,

BUNGAY .
STEREOTYPED AND PRINTED BY J. R. AND C. CH1LDS.

-4t.

UmVersity of Toronto
Library

DO NOT

REMOVE

THE

CARD

FROM

THIS

POCKET

Acme Library Card Pocket

Under Pat. "Ref. indM File"
Made by LIBRARY BUREAU

A